I don't really have a need for Windows, I use Ubuntu at the moment (I used Debian before that) and I use SSH from GNOME to edit the webdevelopment-files directory on the Linux-webserver.
When Windows 7 final actually arrives the netbooks with Atom processor will have enough power to be able to run Windows 7. I actually think maybe that is the only thing Microsoft is really waiting for. As Windows 7 isn't really anything much new, just FistB instead of FistA.
For example, I just got a April 2009 Security Bulletin from Microsoft, what does it say under Affected software for most of the security issues:
Microsoft Security Bulletin MS09-013
- Affected Software:
- Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4
- Windows XP Service Pack 2 and
Windows XP Service Pack 3
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition and
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1 and
Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition and
Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 with SP1 for Itanium-based Systems and
Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Vista and
Windows Vista Service Pack 1
- Windows Vista x64 Edition and
Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 1
- Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems
(Windows Server 2008 Server Core installation affected)
- Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems
(Windows Server 2008 Server Core installation affected)
- Windows Server 2008 for Itanium-based Systems
- Impact: Remote Code Execution
- Version Number: 1.0
Did you see many real differences ? I mean really. I didn't. Even the add-font interface in Vista is still the same as Windows 3.x.;-) Now that people complained they changed that for Windows 7, but I doubt it was needed.
You could actually say, there are more and more systems being developed that work like the software repositories of the Linux-distributions, for example iPhone-appstore and Google's equivelant for the Android-phones. Because it's the same concept, the appstore and Google equivelant are probably more limited, but they are in a way the kind of thing.
The repository system is actually better, you can get updates. The fragmentation of distributions just means the developer of the original software might just not bother to create it. Desktop distributions are now moving to PackageKit. Which will abstract the UI from the backend, I wonder how long it will take for anything to change in the back-end. My guess is it never will, it's always going to be split by rpm/deb I think, but who knows ?
I don't think this is about how simple it is, but how hard it is to fix it, because that is the real problem. If people only need a simple DSL to DOS a server, this is bad news. Obviously, you can limit per IP, but DDOS also becomes much easier this way.
So that's why I think it's very real, more real than say the whole BGP-security stuff. Yes it does happen and the impact might be big, but there are some fixes. But this might be a lot harder to fix.
Actually, it works quiet well with Debian/Ubuntu, just copy it over to the new hardware. Easy peasy. No HAL to worry about like on Windows, it's because Debian/Ubuntu/Linux just recognizes all hardware on startup/plugging it in.
But what about moving to a different OS without a clean-install ? Debian/Linux -> Debian/kFreeBSD.;-)
Actually, I know in Hollywood there are people using Photoshop with Wine on Linux, I think it was even assisted by Adobe. So I know it's possible. That's what kinda ticks me off.
"so there's an economic incentive for the companies in question to inflate features (and prices)"
And this isn't happening either, they are not selling netbooks with 2GB of ram, etc. because Intel en Microsoft won't let them. It doesn't fit well with there other offerings.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't really have a need for Windows, I use Ubuntu at the moment (I used Debian before that) and I use SSH from GNOME to edit the webdevelopment-files directory on the Linux-webserver.
That works really well.
Sorry, English is not my first language and I was a bit tired. ;-)
What I've heared is, the people who do that work, like any hobbiest or professional for that matter, doesn't want to use Vista.
When Windows 7 final actually arrives the netbooks with Atom processor will have enough power to be able to run Windows 7. I actually think maybe that is the only thing Microsoft is really waiting for. As Windows 7 isn't really anything much new, just FistB instead of FistA.
I think eventually Microsoft will do some kind of 'pay for 6 months'-activation and updates will be free ofcourse.
For example, I just got a April 2009 Security Bulletin from Microsoft, what does it say under Affected software for most of the security issues:
Microsoft Security Bulletin MS09-013
- Affected Software:
- Microsoft Windows 2000 Service Pack 4
- Windows XP Service Pack 2 and
Windows XP Service Pack 3
- Windows XP Professional x64 Edition and
Windows XP Professional x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1 and
Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition and
Windows Server 2003 x64 Edition Service Pack 2
- Windows Server 2003 with SP1 for Itanium-based Systems and
Windows Server 2003 with SP2 for Itanium-based Systems
- Windows Vista and
Windows Vista Service Pack 1
- Windows Vista x64 Edition and
Windows Vista x64 Edition Service Pack 1
- Windows Server 2008 for 32-bit Systems
(Windows Server 2008 Server Core installation affected)
- Windows Server 2008 for x64-based Systems
(Windows Server 2008 Server Core installation affected)
- Windows Server 2008 for Itanium-based Systems
- Impact: Remote Code Execution
- Version Number: 1.0
So even the code if very much the same.
Did you see many real differences ? I mean really. I didn't. Even the add-font interface in Vista is still the same as Windows 3.x. ;-) Now that people complained they changed that for Windows 7, but I doubt it was needed.
Microsoft will do everything to lock people in. And they have, that's why it's harder for business to switch now.
Most of the people in my office are on XP, some have Vista, but I'm on 2000. It works just fine.
Why people needed a new version, I have no idea.
PS I have a Ubuntu-desktop at home.
A list apart did a 2008 survey under webdevelopers, which has a list of function names, etc.:
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/findingsfromthewebdesignsurvey2008
You could actually say, there are more and more systems being developed that work like the software repositories of the Linux-distributions, for example iPhone-appstore and Google's equivelant for the Android-phones. Because it's the same concept, the appstore and Google equivelant are probably more limited, but they are in a way the kind of thing.
My Sony TV at home, the TomTom in the car or the Tivo people use in the US... etc, etc. all run Linux.
The documentation of PostgreSQL is also pretty good.
The repository system is actually better, you can get updates. The fragmentation of distributions just means the developer of the original software might just not bother to create it. Desktop distributions are now moving to PackageKit. Which will abstract the UI from the backend, I wonder how long it will take for anything to change in the back-end. My guess is it never will, it's always going to be split by rpm/deb I think, but who knows ?
"There is no open source equivalant of Visual Studio" -> The Java-fanboys would say: NetBeans and Ecplise
I don't think this is about how simple it is, but how hard it is to fix it, because that is the real problem. If people only need a simple DSL to DOS a server, this is bad news. Obviously, you can limit per IP, but DDOS also becomes much easier this way.
So that's why I think it's very real, more real than say the whole BGP-security stuff. Yes it does happen and the impact might be big, but there are some fixes. But this might be a lot harder to fix.
7. kexec also makes sure you never have to see a slow booting BIOS screen again (if you don't poweroff the machine)
Actually, it works quiet well with Debian/Ubuntu, just copy it over to the new hardware. Easy peasy. No HAL to worry about like on Windows, it's because Debian/Ubuntu/Linux just recognizes all hardware on startup/plugging it in.
But what about moving to a different OS without a clean-install ? Debian/Linux -> Debian/kFreeBSD. ;-)
The attack is very real.
Actually, I know in Hollywood there are people using Photoshop with Wine on Linux, I think it was even assisted by Adobe. So I know it's possible. That's what kinda ticks me off.
Does anyone know why they ship it with Linux 2.4 instead of 2.6 ?
This is true, but it's not non-existent which is what I was talking about.
I do think ARM will create problems for Microsoft though.
Ohh, yeah, you are right, not all manufactures actually listen to Intel and Microsoft. ;-)
I think Samsung was also such a manufacturer that didn't want to listen to Intel.
"so there's an economic incentive for the companies in question to inflate features (and prices)"
And this isn't happening either, they are not selling netbooks with 2GB of ram, etc. because Intel en Microsoft won't let them. It doesn't fit well with there other offerings.
I wouldn't say nothing: Windows CE is not nothing.