No flame...but one has to remember that people don't use MS because it's better. Most people use it because it's what came with their computer...and their neighbors computer. And their son's and daughter's computer. And it's the one that runs that software that also comes with their computer.
MS isn't ahead really in better software. Just better marketing and better stranglehold on the computer industry that forces manufacturers of computers to include a copy of Windows on every stinking machine made...
And sorry, MS was NEVER the only game in town. 1999 I was on a Mac...1989 I was on an Amiga, 1985 I was on a Mac, 1979 I was on an Apple II....for a short while I was on an IBM-PC with PC-DOS...but it wasn't because it was the only game in town, Apple was around back then also you know.
How does Sharks Tale compare with "Gone with the Wind"? How about "Citizen Kane"? Does it beat "Return of the King" also?
How does one movie do anything to another movie until it's a satire or a spoof ala "Blazing Saddles"?
Do you look at boxoffice results? Why? Do you have a stake in the movies on the lists? Who cares if one movie made more money or "beat into the ground" at the box-office another? It's almost like you people think it's a sporting event or something!
It's just a movie. You like it, go see it. If not, don't.
I suppose there were a few people out there that were expecting it to be secure...what with MS spending over a year...(maybe longer?) in making SP2 while the world was screaming at it to fix it's security holes.
And THIS is they're response to that. This isn't funny, this isn't a "ha, told you so" kind of thing. This is something that pisses people off. People get fired for this kind of fuck up.
It's a feature! Now you can share all your documents with the world! Think of it as having a server hooked to the internet! Don't have to buy expensive server software or set up very hard to figure out Apache web servers...just install SP2 and you're "online" in more ways than one!
Worry about your ISP not liking you operating a server? They (and you) don't even have to know!
1. Cut & paste...works here. Middle mouse button is MUCH better than on XP. When I have to work on my wife's XP machine, I'm lost for a little while because I have to cut and paste using the keyboard instead of the much quicker middle mouse button. Winner = Linux
2. Games. Tons of games on Linux. So what they are released a little later than on windows. Windows is a games platform...what do you expect? Winner(if you're only a hard-core gamer) = Windows
3. Fonts. Plenty of good, high-quality fonts on Linux. Get OUT of Debian stable...seriously...anti-aliasing etc etc has been on Linux now for years. Stop using old versions of Linux and trying to compare them to Windows. It's like if I were to use a Mac System 6 and comparing it to Windows XP. (wow, can't even run more than one program at a time).
4. Installation - Linux has come light-years in terms of this. Come on...this is a straw man argument now.
5. Applications. You point out that Java on Sun's website had instructions for Mozilla and Netscape, but not Konquerer....um...ok. Use Mozilla or Firefox etc etc. I'm running KDE, but I don't use Konquerer...I use Firefox. Use Firefox...come on...this isn't even a good argument.
6. Sites only working with IE. Granted, there are still old sites out there that are IE specific...but that's not a downfall of Linux, it could also be said for Mac (remember, MS isn't developing IE on the Mac anymore). Sites are also coming around to find that the world doesn't revolve around IE anymore and people are switching to other browsers due to the bugginess and vulnerabilies of IE.
Linux for the desktop is here. It's happening. It's not down the road or will be here someday...it's here now.
Also, where are you getting that Linus refuses to maintain compatibility? Everyone has to ship drivers as source? You REALLY need to get a modern Linux distro to try out.
Come on...next time go all the way and compare Slackware from 1992 with XP or something if you're going to be doing it.
I agree, I have an 11 year old and he isn't interested in Star Wars at all. Know what he likes (over and over and over and over)...the Pixar movies and Shrek. Oh, and Harry Potter too. Throw in some Simpsons and Futurama and Spongebob and he's as sound as a pound.
OK...fine. Then Mr. Lucas...let ME take the original films, refurbish and get them encoded to HD and then release them to the public in DVD then HD-DVD.
I'll throw in a percentage of the gross too. There, you won't have to spend the millions of dollars to refurbish them. All you have to do is cash the percentage check when they come in.
I think the author of this article, John Viega, has some valid concerns if one were to actually RTFA.
Ok, some skeptics may come away saying Viega has a book, Secure Programming Cookbook for C and C++ that he's trying to sell and the site that this article resides in is the very publisher of said book and even though it's kinda mentioned in the article, it's kinda implied through proxy that if you were to buy his book, you're on the road to security salvation...SOME skeptics may think this. I do not.
I think Viega is actually out to help the open source community and shine a flashlight into the dark corners where it needs to go.
He does start to sum it up with a look to the future that is certainly positive: I believe that in the long run, open source software does have the potential to be more secure than closed systems, since open source projects can do everything commercial projects can. When high-quality analysis tools become more common, hopefully the "many eyeballs" phenomenon will work.
If you're a developer, take a look at the article. He's not blasting Open Source and trying to stear everyone to closed source at all.
If you are in an enterprise setting, you either have on staff the IT people that put the system together so they know what is what and what goes where...which is really a simple job, it's not rocket science. Or you're in a service contract with an outside company that knows what is what and what goes where. Either way, there is no application out there for Linux that can't be worked in with minimal effort...if any at all.
I've heard this argument before but I think it's on the line of "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" false-hoods also. I belive that people say these things because everyone else is saying these things because everyone else is saying them. They take on a life of their own but when you actually shine light on the matter, there's nothing there.
For instance, I'm running Gentoo Linux. It's not a Redhat or Suse or even Debian off-shoot. Yet I can run all the programs they do without...how did you put it...specify glibc 2.234, Make 43.23, autoblah 23.. etc. Applications are being built and distributed and run on many many many different distros out there every day.
So I'm sorry, this is a straw-man that the competition loves to throw out there to of course, spread FUD. It's almost a non-issue.
But please, if I'm wrong, give me SPECIFIC examples and links to these examples...I'm always willing to learn and see valid points on the other side.
And you can end up with Linux not being Linux, but Red Hat Linux being different than Novell SUSE Linux, Debian Linux and Mandrake, or whatever the case is.
Very nice. His teacher at FUD school must be beaming now.
Oh well, did you really expect a MS Linux Strategist (nice title btw) to say or do anything different then what we read in the article? The same would be expected from a Linux MS Strategist (if there is such a thing) doing spin on Windows.
Yes, by the time LongHorn comes out humans will have evolved beyond actually hearing sounds and instead have music telepathically beamed into our brains via a quantum computer net that exists in hyperspace.
Huh, I have no idea what you're trying to say so I'm going to just hold on to my ideas...
All kidding aside, this is very interesting. I'll have to read up on this aspect of things because so many times it get's bogged down into what is happening on Slashdot with this subject. I haven't seen so many Troll/Insightfull/Flamebait/Interesting/Overrated/ Funny moderations in a LONG time! It's like watching ping-pong.
I don't see that at all. Also, we never really knew if throwing away all the morality jazz in the 60's would work because it wasn't thrown away. Oh sure, it was talked about, but nothing came of it.
Also, if every generation since has less and less inherited morality, then why is crime and violence DOWN? Why is crime and violence in schools down? Don't listen to the fear-mongers on the news, actually read the numbers. This is in the US mind you...your country of origin may have different trends.
You'd think with more people there would be more chance of adnormal behavior/sociopathic trends but the opposite is happening. Yes, there are some people who fall victim to violent crime...but 30 years ago it was worse than it is today. Things are improving.
"then Galileo must be an "invisible" man whose teachings drive your faith in science"
Nice...but at least Galileo's experiments and findings can all be reproduced and viewed in regards to the science in them. I have no "faith" in science as you tried in vain to turn it around. And of course, the jury is still out on if Christ existed as a flesh and blood person at all. So by "invisible" I mean myth, made up, story, fairy-tale etc etc. Did you really need me to point this out?
On subject, politics use the Bible as a scapegoat for their own needs. It is not to stifle science but as a re-election tool to garner votes from those who would like to stifle science with their beliefs.
Totally agree.
But you keep bringing up "faith" in science. I have no faith. I read what findings are or someones theory on something, digest them, and say "wow, that's interesting"...then move on with my life. I do agree though that there are many factions on both sides of the fence, including those that take science theory as science fact....please elect those who speak with wisdom and do not site their decisions based on talking to God or on unproven science.
This is all fine and good, but why did you post as a Coward? If you really feel this way, sing it to the stars!
Also, my post was ment to be funny. Do I really think the President throws rocks at the sun?
But as for my statement about how I feel that he probably doesn't really read the bible? It's a guess, to be sure. But from what I know of the man and from his past actions, my informed "guess"...and yes, it's still a guess...is that his "born again" attitude and bible thumping is just for votes. Can I prove that? Of course not. I can't know what's in the man's heart.
But you know, I'd respect him more if it WAS an act and if he only did it for the votes.
This is all very interesting...but the "Church" has nothing to do with Bush...as he's not even Catholic but adheres to a much more rigid form: Born-Again Christian. The Born-Again Christians whom I've met in person and have had many talks with belive that the Church is the spawn of Satan...I'm not making that up folks, no joke.
While being an athiest, I DO see where you're coming from and it would certainly be an interesting evening if you and I were to sit down and have a conversation...but I've yet to have an interesting one with a "born-again" who feels in the absolute truth and validity of the Bible and everything...EVERYTHING in it.
I'm an athiest, yet I don't need a set of rules written down in a book to know what is right and wrong. My morals are consistent also.
I've heard this argument before, but I just don't get it. Do you honestly feel that an athiest is some kind of wild-man who runs around in a totally sociopathic way?
Ah, the same church that imprisoned Galileo for his findings and writings?
OK, that was a cheap shot, that was hundreds of years ago. Yet they still belive in an invisible man that lives in the sky and push "intellegent design" over evolution.
But yes, I suppose they do some good in other areas...I mean, they need to spend all those billions of tax-free dollars some where don't they? Besides legal fees in defending their priesthood that is.
Slashdot Mirror
King Arthur: What...."is"?
Knight who says Ni: No not "is". We would get very far in life without saying "is".
No flame...but one has to remember that people don't use MS because it's better. Most people use it because it's what came with their computer...and their neighbors computer. And their son's and daughter's computer. And it's the one that runs that software that also comes with their computer.
MS isn't ahead really in better software. Just better marketing and better stranglehold on the computer industry that forces manufacturers of computers to include a copy of Windows on every stinking machine made...
And sorry, MS was NEVER the only game in town. 1999 I was on a Mac...1989 I was on an Amiga, 1985 I was on a Mac, 1979 I was on an Apple II....for a short while I was on an IBM-PC with PC-DOS...but it wasn't because it was the only game in town, Apple was around back then also you know.
But come on...you knew this...
Beats it into the ground how?
How does Sharks Tale compare with "Gone with the Wind"? How about "Citizen Kane"? Does it beat "Return of the King" also?
How does one movie do anything to another movie until it's a satire or a spoof ala "Blazing Saddles"?
Do you look at boxoffice results? Why? Do you have a stake in the movies on the lists? Who cares if one movie made more money or "beat into the ground" at the box-office another? It's almost like you people think it's a sporting event or something!
It's just a movie. You like it, go see it. If not, don't.
I suppose there were a few people out there that were expecting it to be secure...what with MS spending over a year...(maybe longer?) in making SP2 while the world was screaming at it to fix it's security holes.
And THIS is they're response to that. This isn't funny, this isn't a "ha, told you so" kind of thing. This is something that pisses people off. People get fired for this kind of fuck up.
It's a feature! Now you can share all your documents with the world! Think of it as having a server hooked to the internet! Don't have to buy expensive server software or set up very hard to figure out Apache web servers...just install SP2 and you're "online" in more ways than one!
Worry about your ISP not liking you operating a server? They (and you) don't even have to know!
It's a feature!
1. Cut & paste...works here. Middle mouse button is MUCH better than on XP. When I have to work on my wife's XP machine, I'm lost for a little while because I have to cut and paste using the keyboard instead of the much quicker middle mouse button. Winner = Linux
2. Games. Tons of games on Linux. So what they are released a little later than on windows. Windows is a games platform...what do you expect? Winner(if you're only a hard-core gamer) = Windows
3. Fonts. Plenty of good, high-quality fonts on Linux. Get OUT of Debian stable...seriously...anti-aliasing etc etc has been on Linux now for years. Stop using old versions of Linux and trying to compare them to Windows. It's like if I were to use a Mac System 6 and comparing it to Windows XP. (wow, can't even run more than one program at a time).
4. Installation - Linux has come light-years in terms of this. Come on...this is a straw man argument now.
5. Applications. You point out that Java on Sun's website had instructions for Mozilla and Netscape, but not Konquerer....um...ok. Use Mozilla or Firefox etc etc. I'm running KDE, but I don't use Konquerer...I use Firefox. Use Firefox...come on...this isn't even a good argument.
6. Sites only working with IE. Granted, there are still old sites out there that are IE specific...but that's not a downfall of Linux, it could also be said for Mac (remember, MS isn't developing IE on the Mac anymore). Sites are also coming around to find that the world doesn't revolve around IE anymore and people are switching to other browsers due to the bugginess and vulnerabilies of IE.
Linux for the desktop is here. It's happening. It's not down the road or will be here someday...it's here now.
Also, where are you getting that Linus refuses to maintain compatibility? Everyone has to ship drivers as source? You REALLY need to get a modern Linux distro to try out.
Come on...next time go all the way and compare Slackware from 1992 with XP or something if you're going to be doing it.
sheesh, lighten up...
I agree, I have an 11 year old and he isn't interested in Star Wars at all. Know what he likes (over and over and over and over)...the Pixar movies and Shrek. Oh, and Harry Potter too. Throw in some Simpsons and Futurama and Spongebob and he's as sound as a pound.
But Star Wars? He's like "Meh..."
OK...fine. Then Mr. Lucas...let ME take the original films, refurbish and get them encoded to HD and then release them to the public in DVD then HD-DVD.
I'll throw in a percentage of the gross too. There, you won't have to spend the millions of dollars to refurbish them. All you have to do is cash the percentage check when they come in.
Mmm-kay?
I think the author of this article, John Viega, has some valid concerns if one were to actually RTFA.
Ok, some skeptics may come away saying Viega has a book, Secure Programming Cookbook for C and C++ that he's trying to sell and the site that this article resides in is the very publisher of said book and even though it's kinda mentioned in the article, it's kinda implied through proxy that if you were to buy his book, you're on the road to security salvation...SOME skeptics may think this. I do not.
I think Viega is actually out to help the open source community and shine a flashlight into the dark corners where it needs to go.
He does start to sum it up with a look to the future that is certainly positive: I believe that in the long run, open source software does have the potential to be more secure than closed systems, since open source projects can do everything commercial projects can. When high-quality analysis tools become more common, hopefully the "many eyeballs" phenomenon will work.
If you're a developer, take a look at the article. He's not blasting Open Source and trying to stear everyone to closed source at all.
I know you're trying to be sarcastic...but the truth is I don't have any trouble mixing and matching packages between any of the Linux distros.
Next?
This isn't true.
If you are in an enterprise setting, you either have on staff the IT people that put the system together so they know what is what and what goes where...which is really a simple job, it's not rocket science. Or you're in a service contract with an outside company that knows what is what and what goes where. Either way, there is no application out there for Linux that can't be worked in with minimal effort...if any at all.
I've heard this argument before but I think it's on the line of "Linux isn't ready for the desktop" false-hoods also. I belive that people say these things because everyone else is saying these things because everyone else is saying them. They take on a life of their own but when you actually shine light on the matter, there's nothing there.
For instance, I'm running Gentoo Linux. It's not a Redhat or Suse or even Debian off-shoot. Yet I can run all the programs they do without...how did you put it...specify glibc 2.234, Make 43.23, autoblah 23.. etc. Applications are being built and distributed and run on many many many different distros out there every day.
So I'm sorry, this is a straw-man that the competition loves to throw out there to of course, spread FUD. It's almost a non-issue.
But please, if I'm wrong, give me SPECIFIC examples and links to these examples...I'm always willing to learn and see valid points on the other side.
As you can see here with this little nugget:
And you can end up with Linux not being Linux, but Red Hat Linux being different than Novell SUSE Linux, Debian Linux and Mandrake, or whatever the case is.
Very nice. His teacher at FUD school must be beaming now.
Oh well, did you really expect a MS Linux Strategist (nice title btw) to say or do anything different then what we read in the article? The same would be expected from a Linux MS Strategist (if there is such a thing) doing spin on Windows.
Circle of life...
Yes, by the time LongHorn comes out humans will have evolved beyond actually hearing sounds and instead have music telepathically beamed into our brains via a quantum computer net that exists in hyperspace.
Cause it'll have cool shiney icons and menus that go "swooosshhh"!
Yes, please RIAA...put all of your "secure format" eggs into one basket please. And yes, PLEASE get into bed with Microsoft on this issue. PLEASE!
Please let Microsoft worry about your security concerns!
This will be a great day for music and fans of music everywhere!
Zed : Bring out the Gimp.
Maynard : But the Gimp's sleeping.
Zed : Well, I guess you're gonna have to go wake him up now, won't you?
Do you?
Oh...um...just checked your web site...um...I guess you do.
Huh, I have no idea what you're trying to say so I'm going to just hold on to my ideas...
/ Funny moderations in a LONG time! It's like watching ping-pong.
All kidding aside, this is very interesting. I'll have to read up on this aspect of things because so many times it get's bogged down into what is happening on Slashdot with this subject. I haven't seen so many Troll/Insightfull/Flamebait/Interesting/Overrated
I don't see that at all. Also, we never really knew if throwing away all the morality jazz in the 60's would work because it wasn't thrown away. Oh sure, it was talked about, but nothing came of it.
Also, if every generation since has less and less inherited morality, then why is crime and violence DOWN? Why is crime and violence in schools down? Don't listen to the fear-mongers on the news, actually read the numbers. This is in the US mind you...your country of origin may have different trends.
You'd think with more people there would be more chance of adnormal behavior/sociopathic trends but the opposite is happening. Yes, there are some people who fall victim to violent crime...but 30 years ago it was worse than it is today. Things are improving.
"then Galileo must be an "invisible" man whose teachings drive your faith in science"
...please elect those who speak with wisdom and do not site their decisions based on talking to God or on unproven science.
Nice...but at least Galileo's experiments and findings can all be reproduced and viewed in regards to the science in them. I have no "faith" in science as you tried in vain to turn it around. And of course, the jury is still out on if Christ existed as a flesh and blood person at all. So by "invisible" I mean myth, made up, story, fairy-tale etc etc. Did you really need me to point this out?
On subject, politics use the Bible as a scapegoat for their own needs. It is not to stifle science but as a re-election tool to garner votes from those who would like to stifle science with their beliefs.
Totally agree.
But you keep bringing up "faith" in science. I have no faith. I read what findings are or someones theory on something, digest them, and say "wow, that's interesting"...then move on with my life. I do agree though that there are many factions on both sides of the fence, including those that take science theory as science fact.
Again, I totally agree.
This is all fine and good, but why did you post as a Coward? If you really feel this way, sing it to the stars!
Also, my post was ment to be funny. Do I really think the President throws rocks at the sun?
But as for my statement about how I feel that he probably doesn't really read the bible? It's a guess, to be sure. But from what I know of the man and from his past actions, my informed "guess"...and yes, it's still a guess...is that his "born again" attitude and bible thumping is just for votes. Can I prove that? Of course not. I can't know what's in the man's heart.
But you know, I'd respect him more if it WAS an act and if he only did it for the votes.
This is all very interesting...but the "Church" has nothing to do with Bush...as he's not even Catholic but adheres to a much more rigid form: Born-Again Christian. The Born-Again Christians whom I've met in person and have had many talks with belive that the Church is the spawn of Satan...I'm not making that up folks, no joke.
While being an athiest, I DO see where you're coming from and it would certainly be an interesting evening if you and I were to sit down and have a conversation...but I've yet to have an interesting one with a "born-again" who feels in the absolute truth and validity of the Bible and everything...EVERYTHING in it.
I'm an athiest, yet I don't need a set of rules written down in a book to know what is right and wrong. My morals are consistent also.
I've heard this argument before, but I just don't get it. Do you honestly feel that an athiest is some kind of wild-man who runs around in a totally sociopathic way?
Come on...
Ah, the same church that imprisoned Galileo for his findings and writings?
OK, that was a cheap shot, that was hundreds of years ago. Yet they still belive in an invisible man that lives in the sky and push "intellegent design" over evolution.
But yes, I suppose they do some good in other areas...I mean, they need to spend all those billions of tax-free dollars some where don't they? Besides legal fees in defending their priesthood that is.