Just speculating: how would *AOL* like to get Be? Great OS, multimedia-uber-capable (good for all their movie libraries!). Friendly and more ready for the desktop than most Linux distros. There was talk here yesterday asking AOL to "get their own OS" if they didn't like the icon placement on XP -- well, here's their chance.
Make no mistake folks, this is a major defeat. Not only in a traditional market-share sense, but: it shows (I believe) quite vividly the limitations of Free Software/Open Source models when not backed by a decent business plan. When I see lines like
Finding enough capable programmers and system administrators proved to be the primary obstacle for the project.
I can almost hear the Microsoft marketing machine cranking up on their variation of the JWZ critique: If your time and resources are free, then so is Linux.
Like it or not, to succeed in the real world, you need more than a few über-talented individuals -- you need to carry the lusers and dumbasses along.
But: whining about it is not going to help. What I ask you -- as users, developers, fans, whatever -- what can we do to ensure this never happens again?
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
If I interpret that as 'can't seem to stop running into them'... then -- well, it's pretty easy to associate the mailto (or http for that matter) protocol to any program you choose -- including Opera and Netscape. These programs' install routines do it for you by default, too.
Anyway, there's nothing that stops you from installing all kinds of stuff yourself. What MS counts on, however, is the millions of lusers out there who would never dream of tweaking their computer in any way.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Domino *is* pretty good, actually -- as a mail/ldap/news server, and so on -- on multiple platforms, too. If you buy the Enterprise server you get clustering without the pain Exchange subjects you to. Bit painful as an app server IMHO, but you can crank out apps quickly.
No, my grouse is about the Notes *client*. That sucks:-(. I run it on Win32 and Linux (with Wine), and I look at things like Groove or Evolution, and I wonder which school of interface design the Notes team attended. Basically, the UI is showing its age. And even the iNotes client is not what I would call the pinnacle of web design.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Allowing competition into the market will allow (gasp) innovation to be present, possibly forcing M$ to do something new for a change, like make a better product.
Can you really, truly, honestly say that Internet Explorer 3's architectural design was *worse* than Netscape 3's? It's component-based architecture stunned many people (used to monolithic browsers) at the time , leastways those not [then] blinded by Netscape blinkers.
My point is, MS has had a history of turning out innovative products -- typically when their backs are to the wall. Case in point: Word (target: WordPerfect, though Word never really won over *really* diehard WP fans), Excel (which blew 123 out of the water) and IE3 and IE4 (which buried Communicator).
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Having seen one too many home user's systems, I understand that even windows can be too complicated for some people. They save everything onto the desktop! I've seen some people whose desktop's were so full icons they started pouring off the screen!
Yep, I've seen 'em too, and, boy, do they make my eyes water:-)
Why Microsoft would want to ship their desktop "clean" is beyond me
Maybe because now all well-behaved WinME/2000/XP apps' dialog boxes are supposed to open (by default) at "My Pictures" for graphics and "My Documents" for other documents (and "My Music" for XP)?
Now if only they could somehow convince thousands of ISVs not to "Create an icon on the desktop" as the last step of the default install...
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
The entries in HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\MessengerServ ice\ListCache\MSN Messenger Service are mostly of the form Allownn, Contactnn, Reversenn and a few other entries (including a rather ominous MsgPrivacy entry (with a value of 00 00 00 00 on my machine:-))).
The problem is, contact info for every messenger login made by that Windows username seems to be stored over here. While much of the data is obscured (or seems to be (haven't checked yet)), the email address of each contact is stored in the clear.
Interesting thing to remember the next time you use MSN Messenger at a public computer, or on someone else's machine -- your contact list may just have become public knowledge.
Is this a known issue, by any chance? Can anyone else comment on this? I've checked this out on MSN Messenger 3.6.0025.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Good point. I've always held that there'd be a lot more takers for open source/Free software if people *actually* realized how much (to pick a random example) MS Office actually cost and how draconian the license terms are -- instead of borrowing CDs from friends as so many do currently.
IANAL, but this case actually seems to *encourage* click-wrap licenses, which IMHO is a bad thing:(
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
For example, Netscape's Navigator will not function without a prior clicking of a box constituting assent.Netscape's SmartDownload, in contrast, allows a user to download and use the software without taking any action that plainly manifests assent to
the terms of the associated license or indicates an understanding that a contract is being formed.
What we may see after this is even more aggresive, in-your-face presentation of license agreements. Sites just might start resorting to putting 'I Agree'/'I Disagree' links on their index pages (shudder!) as the only legal way to get their audience to agree with their terms of use.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Free software (the FSF's stuff, Vim, Perl, Python etc) is strong today because it plays well with everyone. It is more useful that way. I hope I never see the day when free software authors start out to shoot themselves in the foot with restrictive licenses.
Don't care much about Mozilla (Konquerer rocks!:-)) but I can't live without Cygwin on an Windows system. And also, how the heck am I supposed to get a decent working environment (think GNU tar, gzip, bash, autoconf) on Solaris (or HP-UX, or Irix, or...) if all this software was released under a brain-dead license like the one the original poster proposed?
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
People hate Gates because he is literally out to destroy Linux.
I think a better reason might be that they're jealous of MS's success? Face it, if enough of their corporate customers demanded Linux software tomorrow, Gates and crew would have no compunctions in creating Office et al for Linux. Or even their own distro -- though they'd probably try to lock people into *that*... leopards rarely change their spots.
And, on a sidenote, don't think Sun, Oracle, et al are angels. (Though, the one company which probably best groks the culture of open source today is IBM.) They support Linux because it is convenient for them to do so. And Sun's support to Linux *on the SPARC platform* comes dangerously close to being called 'lip service'.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
If you had access to some of the.NET "bluesky" videos presented at the PDC when.NET and VS.NET was more or less unveiled, you might think that this interview is practically a narration of one of the many examples of the "scenarios with a.NET connected world".
Ok, so s/\.NET/web\ services/g. I saw one of those 'blue-sky' videos and was sufficiently insprired to start working with SOAP using ( I didn't have a.NET SDK available:( )Java and Apache SOAP.
Web services are much better than a cluster of HTTP POSTs for the same reason that Java servlets are better than CGI scripts (at least for large scale development). Just because MS is hyping web services in.NET doesn't mean web services are bad.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
>And if I turn on JavaScript, the code on the page
>proceeds to maximise my browser window in such a
>way that if I were a newbie, I wouldn't be able
>to access the close button for my browser
I went to boo.com now with JavaScript enabled, and nothing of the sort happened.
>The people who made these dot.coms were for the
>mostpart tricksters and conmen
Clueless web designers, quite possibly. Tricksters and conmen is being a bit harsh, don't you think?
Some time ago, MS used to diss the idea that 'the network is the computer'. Now that the web is everywhere, we have.NET. ("Embrace and extend", all over again...) Make no mistakes folks, this company will do anything to stay on top of the software biz (as of course they have an obligation to their shareholders to). If tomorrow Linux makes it big, Red Hat will suddenly find Redmond pushing for the biggest slice of the pie. Remember the rumor about Mainsoft porting Office to Linux?
>Microsoft's applications business could >easily make Linux versions of applications
>such as Word and Excel available with scant
>development costs.
Um, had a teeny doubt: the generally held wisdom is that the Word/Excel codebases are impossibly crufty and arcane... anybody here with who can comment on how XP they might be?
Great article! I had read more than halfway through it before smelling a rat:)...
The issues raised are very valid ones. I use Linux myself (mostly command line, KDE occasionally) but I know we have a long way to go in (before, say, Linus' parents could use it;)):
* a universal clipboard
* drag and drop
* a modern components-based architecture
* and apps (instead of the toys bundled with the window manager) actually *using* these features!!
That said, with KDE 2, we're gettin' there!! Uh, in the interests of siblinghood, I'll admit that GNOME *might* be getting there too... but more slowly:)
*And* with the flexibility of open-source, Linux will be used in a lot of places where your one-size-fits-all OSes can't be. Imagine BadRAM running on NT...
A lot of people betting on Linux today (IBM comes to mind) do it *because* of the flexibility and choice it offers, and not *in spite* of it.
Re:No Security on a Windows Network
on
Microsoft Cracked
·
· Score: 4
There is no security on ANY network (though Windows is slightly more susceptible to cracks, that's all:-)). If cracking fails, there's always social engineering. You want security, go get a standalone computer. (and don't forget the Tempest shielding -- and the intrusion early-warning system and the leadlined safe.)
Seriously, though... one of the more serious reasons that viruses/trojans spread more easily on Win32/Mac is "user imbecility/gullibility". And one reason (among many others!) why Linux/BSD was considered secure is that (1) users were much more sophisticated, and (2) the OS often compromised on security over 'ease-of-use'.
Today, with Linux (not BSD though (thankfully!)) reaching more and more into the newbie space (I'm just waiting for the first "for-newbies" distro (oh, wait, Corel comes to mind)), how long before something like this happens on a Linux box? Remember, there are a lot of newbies out there running Linux (and also Win2k/NT, for that matter) on their PCs with exactly one user account -- "root"! (or "administrator".)
You do not have to boycott Sony, boycotting Sony Music will be enough to bring 'em back to their senses. Try telling "Teenagers and College-goers are not important" to any music industry exec.
The entire rationale behind the idea of boycott is to *raise awareness* that there are people out there who felt disgusted. After all, Amazon still sells books inspite of the "Boycott Amazon" campaign -- but it is acutely aware of the bad press it is getting.
Slashdot Mirror
It's an usual academic convention to list authors with addresses at the server in that notation. Try davek@... and rubin@...
Just speculating: how would *AOL* like to get Be? Great OS, multimedia-uber-capable (good for all their movie libraries!). Friendly and more ready for the desktop than most Linux distros. There was talk here yesterday asking AOL to "get their own OS" if they didn't like the icon placement on XP -- well, here's their chance.
But: whining about it is not going to help. What I ask you -- as users, developers, fans, whatever -- what can we do to ensure this never happens again?
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
If I interpret that as 'can't seem to stop running into them' ... then -- well, it's pretty easy to associate the mailto (or http for that matter) protocol to any program you choose -- including Opera and Netscape. These programs' install routines do it for you by default, too.
Anyway, there's nothing that stops you from installing all kinds of stuff yourself. What MS counts on, however, is the millions of lusers out there who would never dream of tweaking their computer in any way.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
No, my grouse is about the Notes *client*. That sucks :-(. I run it on Win32 and Linux (with Wine), and I look at things like Groove or Evolution, and I wonder which school of interface design the Notes team attended. Basically, the UI is showing its age. And even the iNotes client is not what I would call the pinnacle of web design.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Yeah, I know how you feel... I have to run Lotus Notes at work (pity me! :-)) and miss out on all the action...
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
My point is, MS has had a history of turning out innovative products -- typically when their backs are to the wall. Case in point: Word (target: WordPerfect, though Word never really won over *really* diehard WP fans), Excel (which blew 123 out of the water) and IE3 and IE4 (which buried Communicator).
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Maybe because now all well-behaved WinME/2000/XP apps' dialog boxes are supposed to open (by default) at "My Pictures" for graphics and "My Documents" for other documents (and "My Music" for XP)?
Now if only they could somehow convince thousands of ISVs not to "Create an icon on the desktop" as the last step of the default install...
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
The entries in HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\MessengerServ ice\ListCache\MSN Messenger Service are mostly of the form Allownn , Contactnn , Reversenn and a few other entries (including a rather ominous MsgPrivacy entry (with a value of 00 00 00 00 on my machine :-))).
The problem is, contact info for every messenger login made by that Windows username seems to be stored over here. While much of the data is obscured (or seems to be (haven't checked yet)), the email address of each contact is stored in the clear .
Interesting thing to remember the next time you use MSN Messenger at a public computer, or on someone else's machine -- your contact list may just have become public knowledge.
Is this a known issue, by any chance? Can anyone else comment on this? I've checked this out on MSN Messenger 3.6.0025.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
IANAL, but this case actually seems to *encourage* click-wrap licenses, which IMHO is a bad thing :(
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
From the judgement :
What we may see after this is even more aggresive, in-your-face presentation of license agreements. Sites just might start resorting to putting 'I Agree'/'I Disagree' links on their index pages (shudder!) as the only legal way to get their audience to agree with their terms of use.____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
If I'm switching through 12 different consoles running on boxes with different build IDs, the last thing I need is to type "ver" all the time.
You -- the user -- doesn't. The developer or tester does.____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
I have a question: who owns the Washington Post?
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Don't care much about Mozilla (Konquerer rocks! :-)) but I can't live without Cygwin on an Windows system. And also, how the heck am I supposed to get a decent working environment (think GNU tar, gzip, bash, autoconf) on Solaris (or HP-UX, or Irix, or ...) if all this software was released under a brain-dead license like the one the original poster proposed?
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
I think a better reason might be that they're jealous of MS's success? Face it, if enough of their corporate customers demanded Linux software tomorrow, Gates and crew would have no compunctions in creating Office et al for Linux. Or even their own distro -- though they'd probably try to lock people into *that*... leopards rarely change their spots.
And, on a sidenote, don't think Sun, Oracle, et al are angels. (Though, the one company which probably best groks the culture of open source today is IBM.) They support Linux because it is convenient for them to do so. And Sun's support to Linux *on the SPARC platform* comes dangerously close to being called 'lip service'.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
... arti cles are belong to us.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Go here and see this.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
Ok, so s/\.NET/web\ services/g. I saw one of those 'blue-sky' videos and was sufficiently insprired to start working with SOAP using ( I didn't have a .NET SDK available :( )Java and Apache SOAP.
Web services are much better than a cluster of HTTP POSTs for the same reason that Java servlets are better than CGI scripts (at least for large scale development). Just because MS is hyping web services in .NET doesn't mean web services are bad.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
>you are saying but I will defend your
>right to say it" (who's quote is this
>anyway?) things
Voltaire, if I remember right.
____________________________
2*b || !(2*b) is a tautology
>And if I turn on JavaScript, the code on the page
>proceeds to maximise my browser window in such a
>way that if I were a newbie, I wouldn't be able
>to access the close button for my browser
I went to boo.com now with JavaScript enabled, and nothing of the sort happened.
>The people who made these dot.coms were for the
>mostpart tricksters and conmen
Clueless web designers, quite possibly. Tricksters and conmen is being a bit harsh, don't you think?
You want MS Linux? Here you are. :)
Some time ago, MS used to diss the idea that 'the network is the computer'. Now that the web is everywhere, we have .NET. ("Embrace and extend", all over again...) Make no mistakes folks, this company will do anything to stay on top of the software biz (as of course they have an obligation to their shareholders to). If tomorrow Linux makes it big, Red Hat will suddenly find Redmond pushing for the biggest slice of the pie. Remember the rumor about Mainsoft porting Office to Linux?
>Microsoft's applications business could
>easily make Linux versions of applications
>such as Word and Excel available with scant
>development costs.
Um, had a teeny doubt: the generally held wisdom is that the Word/Excel codebases are impossibly crufty and arcane... anybody here with who can comment on how XP they might be?
Great article! I had read more than halfway through it before smelling a rat :) ...
;)):
:)
The issues raised are very valid ones. I use Linux myself (mostly command line, KDE occasionally) but I know we have a long way to go in (before, say, Linus' parents could use it
* a universal clipboard
* drag and drop
* a modern components-based architecture
* and apps (instead of the toys bundled with the window manager) actually *using* these features!!
That said, with KDE 2, we're gettin' there!! Uh, in the interests of siblinghood, I'll admit that GNOME *might* be getting there too... but more slowly
*And* with the flexibility of open-source, Linux will be used in a lot of places where your one-size-fits-all OSes can't be. Imagine BadRAM running on NT...
A lot of people betting on Linux today (IBM comes to mind) do it *because* of the flexibility and choice it offers, and not *in spite* of it.
Seriously, though... one of the more serious reasons that viruses/trojans spread more easily on Win32/Mac is "user imbecility/gullibility". And one reason (among many others!) why Linux/BSD was considered secure is that (1) users were much more sophisticated, and (2) the OS often compromised on security over 'ease-of-use'.
Today, with Linux (not BSD though (thankfully!)) reaching more and more into the newbie space (I'm just waiting for the first "for-newbies" distro (oh, wait, Corel comes to mind)), how long before something like this happens on a Linux box? Remember, there are a lot of newbies out there running Linux (and also Win2k/NT, for that matter) on their PCs with exactly one user account -- "root"! (or "administrator".)
You do not have to boycott Sony, boycotting Sony Music will be enough to bring 'em back to their senses. Try telling "Teenagers and College-goers are not important" to any music industry exec. The entire rationale behind the idea of boycott is to *raise awareness* that there are people out there who felt disgusted. After all, Amazon still sells books inspite of the "Boycott Amazon" campaign -- but it is acutely aware of the bad press it is getting.