First off, this guy needs to stop wiping his butt with his Microsoft stock options and get off the valium.
About this so called business that just got an account using Microsoft software. Thats all fine and dandy, just realize that this same contract could have just as easily been won with a *NIX based software solution (or several other whatever based solutions). I've worked for several ISPs and design firms, and never have I seen one win a muli-million dollar contract with their sys admin/sales guy running the show. I almost laughed when reading this. The case is made that "they couldn't have done it wihtout Microsoft". I actually believe this. I think that without Microsoft the post I'm replying to couldn't have happened. I think this because the guy who posted probably couldn't figure out simple command line syntax if he wanted to (which I'm sure he doesn't). The kind of technologies that make millions are the robust, secure, and reliable kind, not the kind that offer pretty dialog boxes and you can buy "For Dummies" books that let you setup a slip-shod business overnight. If all this operation has is a guy who can figure out NT and make a few sales calls then they need to apologize to their multi-million dollar client and tuck their tail between their legs and learn something about useful technology.
Seriously, why does anyone even try with this excuse. "Microsoft software is better because the learning curve is low and I can get my business up and running in no time.". Please. These are the same people who's servers get cracked and abused because they fail to realize the need for security updates. These are the people who see a firewall as a needless expense and not a investment in security. These are the people who sacrifice their firstborn sons to the Bill Gates idols sitting on their kitchen counters.
I'm a capitalist to the extreme, yet I see the need for Open Souce technologies plain as day. Making this kind of Pro-Microsoft argumnet against Open Source technologies is like saying that we should forget about improving the status-quo in base technologies to focus on proprietary money making technologies.
I just wonder what the world would be like today if someone with this guy's mindset was deciding the fate of the polio vaccine.
I agree with you for the most part, except for *your* own childish ignorance.
Yes, there are alot more security alerts for Linux (and other Unix variants) than for NT. Be realistic though, do you honestly think that this is because Linux is less secure? Could the fact that since Linux is openly developed and anyone can see ALL of the source mean that security related bugs are spotted more often? Yes, most Linux disto's default installs suck (Redhat probably being the worst) but don't use the "There are more security alerts for Linux" excuse.
I would venture to say that if NT were developed the same way Linux is, the source being available to anyone, that NO one would be using NT. At least not until the numerous bugs in it were fixed (What was it in Win2k, 60,000+ ?). Personally, I see binary software distrobution as a way to conceal bad programming practices, hide cheap tricks, and load down a program with privacy violating backdoors. I know that last one may seem far fetched to some of you but do you recall the story on/. several months ago about the NSA being provided backdoors into Windows cryto system? It probably happens more often than you think.
Now I'm only 18 years old, but back when *I* was a little wag in high-school (private by the way), we had nothing but junk to use. The school I went to was a small poorly funded private school, I liked it alot, but the equipment we had to use was stone age. We had two 486's (DX 25's) one OLD 386 and a bunch of REALLY OLD 8086's & 8088's.
The equipment didn't even bother me as much as the curriculum. "Computer Class" consisted of a program called "Typing 101", a small DOS based typing tutor that was about as much fun as detention. That was IT. Surpisingly, I did learn quite a bit in that class, although not from the teacher. The only way I learned jack-squat was by ignoring the teacher and reading though a few of the manuals we had, and then playing around. At the time, I learned some very useful information about DOS, such as how to change the keyboard layout and ruin all the other kid's typing scores.
I guess I'm a little bitter about the fact that I didn't have as much opportunity as the kids at this school get, but this kind of thing is practically non-existant. Most "computer" teachers aren't qualified to turn on the systems they teach about, much less instruct on the system's use.
</RANT> -- AdamX "A witty saying proves nothing." -Voltaire
At first I must admit, I cannot stand one word penned by the hand of Jon Katz. No matter where I've read anything he has written, whether it be Wired,/., etc, Jon Katz (IMHO) is merely a leech of a journalist. Just so you know, I filter Katz out on my account, and happened to click on the headline while browsing themes.org. I feel the need elaborate on an already well discussed (and off topic for this story) issue because it seems that Rob (or whoever) has yet to do something about it.
Now not to say I don't like the man himself, and this isn't a slam on his writing (even though I don't like it), but the one thing I must point out is that Jon Katz is horribly out of place. Sure, he is a "tech writer" or whatever you want to call him, but he knows very little about the subject matter on which he writes (yes, I know its been going on for ages). Is it to much to ask for someone who has actual technical experience? Does anyone honestly believe that merely knowing how to write makes a person fit for covering any topic as an authority?
I will even go so far to say that Mr. Katz isn't even a bad writer, he can get the point across elegantly (most of the time) and can even write a decent review every now and then (*cough*). The fact that he makes a habit of using exessive and brown-nosing verbage (Read: hype) when imparting his wisdom to the world is what makes him so annoying. He reminds my alot of a "suit".
All that being said, there is a place for Mr. Katz in this world (even if alot of ACs don't think likewise), I just don't think its on slashdot. As far as "News for Nerds" goes, Jon Katz should have never been allowed on the site. Jon Katz isn't a nerd, nor can he accurately write for or about them.
Realize that my opinion doesn't really matter, I'm merely sharing it. Why doesn't my opinion matter? Because of that second part of the slogan, "Stuff that matters (to Rob)". Rob (for some strange reason) liked Katz enough to give him an account, and all the AC flame in the world isn't going to change that.
So now we have a paradox.
Now I must contradict myself. Above I say that "Rob must do something about it", yet that won't ever happen, and really, even after saying so, deep down I don't care. It doesn't bother me that much, I'll keep filtering Katz just like always, and Katz will continue to make the small crowd of suits who saw "That slashdot thing" in a trade mag feel like someone still cares. Why did I bother to post this? Wasting my time, your time,/. disk space, and annoying some moderator by posting off topic? Well, because like my opinion, it doesn't really matter. When will anything we say here matter? When the people who run this place start taking us seriously.
So flame Katz to the ground, be my guest, it won't change a thing. Talk is cheap, if you guys want Katz of/. the only way to get what you want is to boycott for it. I don't just mean filter Katz, I mean stop reading slashdot all together. Otherwise, shut your holes.
Enough said.
-- AdamX "A witty saying proves nothing." -Voltaire
First consider this, say that MS was to actually release the source to Win2k (all 60 million lines of it), the newlines alone would make up around 4.8 MB of the code.
No matter which version they would release, I'm quite sure that the code would be so large, and so needlessly complex (in a disorganized sloppy kind of way) that there would have to be an open source project just to clean it up. Plus, the years of crud thrown on top of an already weak foundation, I can't imagine.
It would most definitely be a boost to projects like WINE. It has the protential to help ALOT of companies. Will it happen? I doubt it. MS has always been abount closed source. For while, they didn't even like thier employees writing any sort of software unless it was company related.
The bottom line is, if they do it, I'm using it as my entry in the Obfuscated C code contest.;)
-- AdamX "A witty saying proves nothing." -Voltaire
Slashdot Mirror
First off, this guy needs to stop wiping his butt with his Microsoft stock options and get off the valium.
About this so called business that just got an account using Microsoft software. Thats all fine and dandy, just realize that this same contract could have just as easily been won with a *NIX based software solution (or several other whatever based solutions). I've worked for several ISPs and design firms, and never have I seen one win a muli-million dollar contract with their sys admin/sales guy running the show. I almost laughed when reading this. The case is made that "they couldn't have done it wihtout Microsoft". I actually believe this. I think that without Microsoft the post I'm replying to couldn't have happened. I think this because the guy who posted probably couldn't figure out simple command line syntax if he wanted to (which I'm sure he doesn't). The kind of technologies that make millions are the robust, secure, and reliable kind, not the kind that offer pretty dialog boxes and you can buy "For Dummies" books that let you setup a slip-shod business overnight. If all this operation has is a guy who can figure out NT and make a few sales calls then they need to apologize to their multi-million dollar client and tuck their tail between their legs and learn something about useful technology.
Seriously, why does anyone even try with this excuse. "Microsoft software is better because the learning curve is low and I can get my business up and running in no time.". Please. These are the same people who's servers get cracked and abused because they fail to realize the need for security updates. These are the people who see a firewall as a needless expense and not a investment in security. These are the people who sacrifice their firstborn sons to the Bill Gates idols sitting on their kitchen counters.
I'm a capitalist to the extreme, yet I see the need for Open Souce technologies plain as day. Making this kind of Pro-Microsoft argumnet against Open Source technologies is like saying that we should forget about improving the status-quo in base technologies to focus on proprietary money making technologies.
I just wonder what the world would be like today if someone with this guy's mindset was deciding the fate of the polio vaccine.
This post is Copyright 2000 AdamX
I agree with you for the most part, except for *your* own childish ignorance.
/. several months ago about the NSA being provided backdoors into Windows cryto system? It probably happens more often than you think.
Yes, there are alot more security alerts for Linux (and other Unix variants) than for NT. Be realistic though, do you honestly think that this is because Linux is less secure? Could the fact that since Linux is openly developed and anyone can see ALL of the source mean that security related bugs are spotted more often? Yes, most Linux disto's default installs suck (Redhat probably being the worst) but don't use the "There are more security alerts for Linux" excuse.
I would venture to say that if NT were developed the same way Linux is, the source being available to anyone, that NO one would be using NT. At least not until the numerous bugs in it were fixed (What was it in Win2k, 60,000+ ?). Personally, I see binary software distrobution as a way to conceal bad programming practices, hide cheap tricks, and load down a program with privacy violating backdoors. I know that last one may seem far fetched to some of you but do you recall the story on
This post is Copyright 2000 AdamX
Since when the heck has religous fundamentalism been a problem?
This post is Copyright 2000 AdamX
<RANT>
Now I'm only 18 years old, but back when *I* was a little wag in high-school (private by the way), we had nothing but junk to use. The school I went to was a small poorly funded private school, I liked it alot, but the equipment we had to use was stone age. We had two 486's (DX 25's) one OLD 386 and a bunch of REALLY OLD 8086's & 8088's.
The equipment didn't even bother me as much as the curriculum. "Computer Class" consisted of a program called "Typing 101", a small DOS based typing tutor that was about as much fun as detention. That was IT. Surpisingly, I did learn quite a bit in that class, although not from the teacher. The only way I learned jack-squat was by ignoring the teacher and reading though a few of the manuals we had, and then playing around. At the time, I learned some very useful information about DOS, such as how to change the keyboard layout and ruin all the other kid's typing scores.
I guess I'm a little bitter about the fact that I didn't have as much opportunity as the kids at this school get, but this kind of thing is practically non-existant. Most "computer" teachers aren't qualified to turn on the systems they teach about, much less instruct on the system's use.
</RANT>
--
AdamX
"A witty saying proves nothing." -Voltaire
At first I must admit, I cannot stand one word penned by the hand of Jon Katz. No matter where I've read anything he has written, whether it be Wired, /., etc, Jon Katz (IMHO) is merely a leech of a journalist. Just so you know, I filter Katz out on my account, and happened to click on the headline while browsing themes.org. I feel the need elaborate on an already well discussed (and off topic for this story) issue because it seems that Rob (or whoever) has yet to do something about it.
/. disk space, and annoying some moderator by posting off topic? Well, because like my opinion, it doesn't really matter. When will anything we say here matter? When the people who run this place start taking us seriously.
/. the only way to get what you want is to boycott for it. I don't just mean filter Katz, I mean stop reading slashdot all together. Otherwise, shut your holes.
Now not to say I don't like the man himself, and this isn't a slam on his writing (even though I don't like it), but the one thing I must point out is that Jon Katz is horribly out of place. Sure, he is a "tech writer" or whatever you want to call him, but he knows very little about the subject matter on which he writes (yes, I know its been going on for ages). Is it to much to ask for someone who has actual technical experience? Does anyone honestly believe that merely knowing how to write makes a person fit for covering any topic as an authority?
I will even go so far to say that Mr. Katz isn't even a bad writer, he can get the point across elegantly (most of the time) and can even write a decent review every now and then (*cough*). The fact that he makes a habit of using exessive and brown-nosing verbage (Read: hype) when imparting his wisdom to the world is what makes him so annoying. He reminds my alot of a "suit".
All that being said, there is a place for Mr. Katz in this world (even if alot of ACs don't think likewise), I just don't think its on slashdot. As far as "News for Nerds" goes, Jon Katz should have never been allowed on the site. Jon Katz isn't a nerd, nor can he accurately write for or about them.
Realize that my opinion doesn't really matter, I'm merely sharing it. Why doesn't my opinion matter? Because of that second part of the slogan, "Stuff that matters (to Rob)". Rob (for some strange reason) liked Katz enough to give him an account, and all the AC flame in the world isn't going to change that.
So now we have a paradox.
Now I must contradict myself. Above I say that "Rob must do something about it", yet that won't ever happen, and really, even after saying so, deep down I don't care. It doesn't bother me that much, I'll keep filtering Katz just like always, and Katz will continue to make the small crowd of suits who saw "That slashdot thing" in a trade mag feel like someone still cares. Why did I bother to post this? Wasting my time, your time,
So flame Katz to the ground, be my guest, it won't change a thing. Talk is cheap, if you guys want Katz of
Enough said.
--
AdamX
"A witty saying proves nothing." -Voltaire
First consider this, say that MS was to actually release the source to Win2k (all 60 million lines of it), the newlines alone would make up around 4.8 MB of the code.
;)
No matter which version they would release, I'm quite sure that the code would be so large, and so needlessly complex (in a disorganized sloppy kind of way) that there would have to be an open source project just to clean it up. Plus, the years of crud thrown on top of an already weak foundation, I can't imagine.
It would most definitely be a boost to projects like WINE. It has the protential to help ALOT of companies. Will it happen? I doubt it. MS has always been abount closed source. For while, they didn't even like thier employees writing any sort of software unless it was company related.
The bottom line is, if they do it, I'm using it as my entry in the Obfuscated C code contest.
--
AdamX
"A witty saying proves nothing." -Voltaire