You are exactly correct, but it is likely that this same windows 2K admin spent 50K on a exchange server licensing instead of a better use like upgrading his clients or even better their hardware. Innovation requires little money it requires knowledge and using what you have available to do it cheaper and better than your competitors.
In order to dominate the desktop the monopoly currently strangling the market needs to be removed. The linux desktop does not dominate only because of the noose on the OEMs and it is also the reason BEOS got no where.
I am no Mac fan but I actually think that apple currently has the ability to shake the market to it's core. They now have a intel version of the operating system, increase the driver support and put it on the shelves and I think it could really create a explosive impact on the home desktop industry.
Ok again here you go....a little citation for you, this from the court they heard the evidence and the verdict is in the document for all to read.
In its Findings of Fact, the District Court found that Microsoft had repeatedly withheld such API information from ISVs, or used its disclosure as an incentive for 'friendlier' behavior, in an effort to preserve the applications barrier to entry (Findings, 84, 90, 91).
In its Findings of Fact, the District Court found that Microsoft had repeatedly withheld such information from ISVs, or used its disclosure as an incentive for 'friendlier' behavior, in an effort to preserve the applications barrier to entry (Findings, 84, 90, 91).
The rest I am not going to bother addressing, go back to playing with your rental operating system.
It is not really a conspiracy but a well known fact that they do not publish large portions of their api's. This fact has been brought up in court numerous times. Just recently they tried to hold back the security api until it became public they where doing so. If it was just a conspiracy they would not be having to produce a actual published api for the EU.
When you develop software for windows you are coding on a platform owned by your direct competitor. The fact that they hold back stuff for internal use should really be no surprise.
Interesting but how about attacking in this fashion. First of all a user needs to hit a web page to activate the control. What if I put a css file in the page which is not really css at all but say perhaps vb script or ftp commands. That would get the script to the client for execution, this is of course if IE does not validate content which I am not sure if it does or not.
I got real pissed off last year and decided that I am no longer gonna be subjected to swings in the fuel market. I bought a corn stove and installed it, best thing I ever did, so far this year heat has cost me less than 1/3 of what it normally does. Much simpler system than what is described here, corn in and heat out. My stove is also multi fuel if corn goes high I can buy wood pellets, barley, cherry pits etc whatever is running the cheapest.
You bet open up a command window and type ftp you will notice that it has a built in ftp client. Simply calling the run method on this control in a script and you can run anything you want, download or upload anything you want just by the client browsing a web page.
Well considering they are the creators of the almighty active x control that allows unsafe code execution in a browser, I would say yes he is suggesting that.
And he would be absolutely correct, well acer is not exactly off the hook here either.
I have not seen the control or have a copy of it but it can be a simple as a couple of lines of script in a web page. Now I can possibly own most acer laptops visiting that page.
The script could do something like this ftp somehost ftp get somefile execute somefile
Bingo I own your laptop.
Or say I just ftp your firefox data so I can grab your history, passwords etc.
Actually the last 15% of those IIS installations have been bought by microsoft, take for instance the latest Go-Daddy payola to switch their virtual hosting to IIS recently. Yes you are correct it is better than it used to be but don't post numbers that have been bought as evidence of it being a secure web server.
Yep it is just you, as the security administrator at work I see the same claims every single day. I call some user who has a owned machine and he proceeds to tell me there is no way his machine is infected or owned it simply cannot be as the machine seems completely normal. Well completely normal as long as you ignore the fact that it is actively connected to a irc channel without the users knowledge.
I also hear the same bs about web sites out of windows users and administrators as well. Just don't go to any bad web sites and you will not have problems. It is not the users fault they are using a insecure browser it is the vendor's fault plain and simple. I run Linux and will point my browser to any site on the web and not worry about getting exploited.
If you are worried about your software being pretty you should probably stick with windows. If you want software that works and is secure then you might want to try linux.
Yep then this magically secure windows box user fires up IE surfs a couple of web sites and gets smoked by a remote code execution vulnerability. Oh let me guess, it is the users fault since he visited some sites he wasn't supposed to. Face the facts, if you connect a windows box to the Internet it is not a matter of if you will be owned but how quickly you will be owned. I have had numerous people tell me that they never have a problem, go look at their PC and guess what most of the time they are owned but are too ignorant to know it.
Yes you can do a fairly good job of securing a windows box but about the time you get it right you are left with a computer that has the usefulness of a toaster.
Yes I agree, I do fully expect either that to happen or the supreme court to sidestep that argument completely as they usually do, easier to let that just hang in the air vs creating chaos in the system and killing the cash cow on the govt.
"The brief also argues that the Federal Circuit's decisions declaring software to be patentable subject matter conflict with Supreme Court precedent, and thus should be overruled."
They argue in the brief that software as a whole is not patentable and the patenting of software conflicts with earlier supreme court rulings.
He did not like how his employer was circumventing the spirit of the license by which his code is developed. You see it does not matter what you, Novell, MS, HP etc thinks this is about developers. In a FOSS development model those commercial entities mean absolutely nothing at all, the developer who licensed the code steers the ship, not the other way around.
Good on him, it is his code!
Not like he has to work very hard at finding a new job anyhow.
You sir could not be more correct... We have servers that process tens of thousands of xmlrpc transactions per day and could not be happier with it. SOAP is a absolutley over engineered, complicated pain in the ass spec to deal with. The couple of features it does have over xmlrpc do are not worth the complication of dealing wih it.
Nearly every thing you said is true up until you hit the part about the windows installer being easy to create. If you are targeting a single windows version and patch level then yes it is fairly easy. If you want it to actually install on a couple of different versions you have a real nightmare on your hands depending on the dependencies.
Slashdot Mirror
You are exactly correct, but it is likely that this same windows 2K admin spent 50K on a exchange server
licensing instead of a better use like upgrading his clients or even better their hardware. Innovation requires little money it requires knowledge and using what you have available to do it cheaper and better than your competitors.
Here, this little link should provide you with the necessary knowledge to use ODBC which has been
supported since version 1.0
http://www.unixodbc.org/doc/OOoMySQL.pdf
Now let's figure ruining your life into into that total cost of ownership.
In order to dominate the desktop the monopoly currently strangling the market needs to be removed. The linux desktop does not dominate only because of the noose on the OEMs and it is also the reason BEOS got no where.
I am no Mac fan but I actually think that apple currently has the ability to shake the market to it's core. They now have a intel version of the operating system, increase the driver support and put it on the shelves and I think it could really create a explosive impact on the home desktop industry.
Ok again here you go....a little citation for you, this from the court they heard the evidence and the verdict is in the document for all to read.
In its Findings of Fact, the District Court found that Microsoft had repeatedly withheld such API information from ISVs, or used its disclosure as an incentive for 'friendlier' behavior, in an effort to preserve the applications barrier to entry (Findings, 84, 90, 91).
No, you are wrong
Ok Windows fan boy, chew on this a little bit..
In its Findings of Fact, the District Court found that Microsoft had repeatedly withheld such information from ISVs, or used its disclosure as an incentive for 'friendlier' behavior, in an effort to preserve the applications barrier to entry (Findings, 84, 90, 91).
The rest I am not going to bother addressing, go back to playing with your rental operating system.
It is not really a conspiracy but a well known fact that they do not publish large portions of
their api's. This fact has been brought up in court numerous times. Just recently they tried to hold
back the security api until it became public they where doing so. If it was just a conspiracy they would not be having to produce a actual published api for the EU.
When you develop software for windows you are coding on a platform owned by your direct competitor. The fact that they hold back stuff for internal use should really be no surprise.
Interesting but how about attacking in this fashion. First of all a user needs to hit a web page to activate the control. What if I put a css file in the page which is not really css at all but say perhaps vb script or ftp commands. That would get the script to the client for execution, this is of course if IE does not validate content which I am not sure if it does or not.
I got real pissed off last year and decided that I am no longer gonna be subjected to
swings in the fuel market. I bought a corn stove and installed it, best thing I ever did, so far
this year heat has cost me less than 1/3 of what it normally does. Much simpler system than what is described here, corn in and heat out. My stove is also multi fuel if corn goes high I can buy wood pellets, barley, cherry pits etc whatever is running the cheapest.
You bet open up a command window and type ftp you will notice that it has a built in ftp client. Simply calling the run method on this control in a script and you can run anything you want, download or upload anything you want just by the client browsing a web page.
Well considering they are the creators of the almighty active x control that allows unsafe code execution in a browser, I would say yes he is suggesting that.
And he would be absolutely correct, well acer is not exactly off the hook here either.
Give me the clsid of the control and method name and I can hook you up in about 45 seconds.
Yes delete kernel32.dll and install something more appropriate.
I have not seen the control or have a copy of it but it can be a simple as a couple of lines
of script in a web page. Now I can possibly own most acer laptops visiting that page.
The script could do something like this
ftp somehost
ftp get somefile
execute somefile
Bingo I own your laptop.
Or say I just ftp your firefox data so I can grab your history, passwords etc.
Actually the last 15% of those IIS installations have been bought by microsoft, take for instance the
latest Go-Daddy payola to switch their virtual hosting to IIS recently. Yes you are correct it is better than it used to be but don't post numbers that have been bought as evidence of it being a secure web server.
Yep it is just you, as the security administrator at work I see the same claims every single day. I call some user who has a owned machine and he proceeds to tell me there is no way his machine is infected or owned it simply cannot be as the machine seems completely normal. Well completely normal as long as you ignore the fact that it is actively connected to a irc channel without the users knowledge.
I also hear the same bs about web sites out of windows users and administrators as well. Just don't go to any bad web sites and you will not have problems. It is not the users fault they are using a insecure browser it is the vendor's fault plain and simple. I run Linux and will point my browser to any site on the web and not worry about getting exploited.
If you are worried about your software being pretty you should probably stick with windows. If you want software that works and is secure then you might want to try linux.
Yep then this magically secure windows box user fires up IE surfs a couple of web sites and
gets smoked by a remote code execution vulnerability. Oh let me guess, it is the users fault
since he visited some sites he wasn't supposed to. Face the facts, if you connect a windows box
to the Internet it is not a matter of if you will be owned but how quickly you will be owned. I have had numerous people tell me that they never have a problem, go look at their PC and guess what most of the time they are owned but are too ignorant to know it.
Yes you can do a fairly good job of securing a windows box but about the time you get it right you
are left with a computer that has the usefulness of a toaster.
Yes I agree, I do fully expect either that to happen or the supreme court to sidestep that argument completely as they usually do, easier to let that just hang in the air vs creating chaos in the system and killing the cash cow on the govt.
"The brief also argues that the Federal Circuit's decisions declaring software to be patentable subject matter conflict with Supreme Court precedent, and thus should be overruled."
They argue in the brief that software as a whole is not patentable and the patenting of software conflicts with earlier supreme court rulings.
He did not like how his employer was circumventing the spirit of the license by which his code is developed. You see it does not matter what you, Novell, MS, HP etc thinks this is about developers. In a FOSS development model those commercial entities mean absolutely nothing at all, the developer who licensed the code steers the ship, not the other way around.
Good on him, it is his code!
Not like he has to work very hard at finding a new job anyhow.
However, nobody is saying samba has got to be easy to compile, run or maintain on Novell's distro.
You sir could not be more correct... We have servers that process tens of thousands of xmlrpc transactions per day and could not be happier with it. SOAP is a absolutley over engineered, complicated pain in the ass spec to deal with. The couple of features it does have over xmlrpc do are not worth the complication of dealing wih it.
I would say that HP is full of doodoo, how about a gaming console without games is that not a product
either?
Hell even the grocery store I go to gives me a choice between paper and plastic...
So yes why not they should be forced by law to make a choice available.
Nearly every thing you said is true up until you hit the part about the windows installer being
easy to create. If you are targeting a single windows version and patch level then yes it is
fairly easy. If you want it to actually install on a couple of different versions you have a real
nightmare on your hands depending on the dependencies.