The reason Klez is so successful is that it doesn't rely on Outlook. From the Symantec writeup (http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.klez.h @mm.html): "This worm searches the Windows address book, the ICQ database, and local files for email addresses. The worm sends an email message to these addresses with itself as an attachment...The worm contains its own SMTP engine and attempts to guess at available SMTP servers. For example, if the worm encounters the address user@abc123.com it will attempt to send email via the server smtp.abc123.com."
You're comparing a new version of Evolution to a 5+ year old version of Outlook? Doesn't sound fair to me.
Incidentally, scream at your company, if they are going to use Outlook, to upgrade to a more current version. Microsoft stopped making security and other patches for Outlook 97 a while ago. It's people like you that keep KLEZ writers in business.
Sun's announcement that they were withdrawing from the ECMA process was in December '99.
The March 2000 JavaWorld has an interview with ECMA officials that, as Gosling says, makes for interesting reading:
ECMA responded by chastising Sun for causing an "enormous waste of experts' time and companies' money." In an interview today, a top ECMA official said Sun's criticisms of the group are merely a smokescreen for its real motives for ending the relationship.
"They just don't want to give up control" of Java, said Jan van den Beld, secretary-general of ECMA. "It is 100 percent my opinion that Sun is publicly saying they want to make Java a standard, but privately not making it happen."
Not correct. Microsoft has two embedded code bases, Windows XP Embedded and Windows CE. See http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/default. asp for the differences.
As Gates made very clear in his testimony, Windows XP Embedded is based on the Windows XP code, but without an installer for new applications.
>>My CIO would be reading her hotmail or yahoo mail, whatever. Point is it was a mail service outside of my control. She would see the subject, "I love you" and thinking it was a date, she would open it, from which it would spread like mad cow diesease. The rest of my day would be spent cleaning out her crap.
Everything on Yahoo! Mail and Hotmail has been virus-scanned at the server (by Symantec and McAfee respectively) for at least 2 years. They're very aggressive about updates. Nobody gets infected via these systems. It's the idiots who are still running Outlook 97 who are causing all the problems
Remote control software is a really, really old idea. There are at least a dozen commercial products for Windows that do the same thing and many of them are well over 10 years old. VNC is a nice program, and since it's GPL it will live on, but it was never revolutionary at anything. In fact, it's hard to see why AT&T spent any effort on it.
I find it hard to believe that Compuserve still has 3 million subscribers. I used to know large numbers of them, but I can think of exactly one person now that I know that uses it.
Oldest trick in the NT book. Been there since NT 3.1 I'm pretty sure, although the article says 4.0. You can actually use any keyboard character, not just tab.
Incidentally, it sounds like some people think Microsoft hides info about cmd.exe. Try going into a session and typing "HELP"
This assertion that the page will just download and install the program is a pretty bold one to make without any backup. It could possibly be done by taking advantage of an exploit in the browser, but not through any legitimate facility.
I wouldn't assume that the documentation is wrong, but that Bruce Schneier is. The quote in the parent accurately reflects what is in Schneier's essay: He makes an unsourced reference to "Microsoft's Documentation". I wonder what else he makes up in the article.
In this article, MS "...demonstrates the creation of SOAP servers and clients that communicate using different transports: sockets, Microsoft Message Queue, the file system, and a custom HTTP listener."
In this one, we find the quote: "The fourth part of the specification defines a binding between SOAP and HTTP. However, this part is also optional. You can use SOAP in combination with any transport protocol or mechanism that is able to transport the SOAP envelope, including SMTP, FTP or even a floppy disk."
At the top of the main developer resources for SOAP page, we find another quote: "SOAP is a lightweight and simple XML-based protocol that is designed to exchange structured and typed information on the Web. The purpose of SOAP is to enable rich and automated Web services based on a shared and open Web infrastructure. SOAP can be used in combination with a variety of existing Internet protocols and formats including HTTP, SMTP, and MIME and can support a wide range of applications from messaging systems to RPC"
But Microsoft is in the workstation and server businesses, and they are better, more profitable growth opportunities for Microsoft than the desktop PC market that they locked up years ago. Why would you assume that companies like Dell can be bullied out of the desktop PC market by MS but not the server and workstation markets?
Penguin Computing sells "workstations," but only fairly high-end stuff, which means if you're a potential customer you can also buy from Dell, Compaq, IBM, etc.
Your point, that a company that sold mainstream Linux PCs would have a wide-open market to themselves, is absolutely valid. Why is there no such company? Because it's been tried and it doesn't work. There's no market for such a company. To assume that Dell and Gateway don't sell them because of pressure by Microsoft ignores a far more obvious answer.
I think the important point is that VA was obviously losing money on their PC business. And remember, this is in spite of a large software cost advantage vis-a-vis most PC vendors. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that major PC vendors also legitimately see no market in Linux desktops.
>>And you hardly had to buy VA Linux hardware to run Linux
Exactly, this dynamic works for Dell and Gateway and IBM too. Why should people buy Linux systems from them when they can home-grow systems?
I've never believed the OS/2 stories, but that's just one company's word against another's. As for Lotus SmartSuite, IBM has always shipped it with their Windows computers and still does.
Any serious business buyer knew this company existed. It was one of the most famous IPOs of the nut-case Internet era. People knew this company existed and still didn't buy their computers. If you really believe that people didn't know about VA you've got a massive case of denial.
Dell still does offer workstations with Linux you doofus. Did you just assume they didn't? http://www.dell.com/us/en/esg/topics/linux_003_pro ducts.htm
Gateway can assert that Microsoft pressured them, but if there's really a market for Linux desktops then other companies would be offering them and making sales.
So why did VA stop selling Linux systems? Alleged Microsoft pressure on mainstream vendors not to sell Linux should only have made things better for VA, assuming there really was a market for Linux desktops. But the fact is that there is no serious market for Linux desktops.
While we're at it, I simply don't believe that IBM could be subject to such pressure, and yet they too have pretty much abandoned the Linux desktop and notebook business. You used to be able to find Thinkpads for sale on IBM's site with Linux on them, but not anymore. Does anyone seriously believe IBM talked them out of this? Isn't the Occam's Razor answer that they weren't selling?
In fact, stockholders were allowed to vote multiple times and the last vote cast is the one that counts. There's no way that anyone can know the results yet.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason Klez is so successful is that it doesn't rely on Outlook. From the Symantec writeup (http://www.sarc.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.klez.h @mm.html): "This worm searches the Windows address book, the ICQ database, and local files for email addresses. The worm sends an email message to these addresses with itself as an attachment...The worm contains its own SMTP engine and attempts to guess at available SMTP servers. For example, if the worm encounters the address user@abc123.com it will attempt to send email via the server smtp.abc123.com."
>>...Outlook (97 at least)...
You're comparing a new version of Evolution to a 5+ year old version of Outlook? Doesn't sound fair to me.
Incidentally, scream at your company, if they are going to use Outlook, to upgrade to a more current version. Microsoft stopped making security and other patches for Outlook 97 a while ago. It's people like you that keep KLEZ writers in business.
The March 2000 JavaWorld has an interview with ECMA officials that, as Gosling says, makes for interesting reading:
"They just don't want to give up control" of Java, said Jan van den Beld, secretary-general of ECMA. "It is 100 percent my opinion that Sun is publicly saying they want to make Java a standard, but privately not making it happen."
Not correct. Microsoft has two embedded code bases, Windows XP Embedded and Windows CE. See http://www.microsoft.com/windows/embedded/default. asp for the differences.
As Gates made very clear in his testimony, Windows XP Embedded is based on the Windows XP code, but without an installer for new applications.
The issue has never been modularity. Windows is highly modular. The problem is dependencies between those modules. Pull one out and others may fail.
>>My CIO would be reading her hotmail or yahoo mail, whatever. Point is it was a mail service outside of my control. She would see the subject, "I love you" and thinking it was a date, she would open it, from which it would spread like mad cow diesease. The rest of my day would be spent cleaning out her crap.
Everything on Yahoo! Mail and Hotmail has been virus-scanned at the server (by Symantec and McAfee respectively) for at least 2 years. They're very aggressive about updates. Nobody gets infected via these systems. It's the idiots who are still running Outlook 97 who are causing all the problems
Remote control software is a really, really old idea. There are at least a dozen commercial products for Windows that do the same thing and many of them are well over 10 years old. VNC is a nice program, and since it's GPL it will live on, but it was never revolutionary at anything. In fact, it's hard to see why AT&T spent any effort on it.
I find it hard to believe that Compuserve still has 3 million subscribers. I used to know large numbers of them, but I can think of exactly one person now that I know that uses it.
Lots more interesting docs when you do cmd /?
Oldest trick in the NT book. Been there since NT 3.1 I'm pretty sure, although the article says 4.0. You can actually use any keyboard character, not just tab. Incidentally, it sounds like some people think Microsoft hides info about cmd.exe. Try going into a session and typing "HELP"
Lexmark is a public company. IBM doesn't own even a substantial part of it.
This assertion that the page will just download and install the program is a pretty bold one to make without any backup. It could possibly be done by taking advantage of an exploit in the browser, but not through any legitimate facility.
In this article, MS "...demonstrates the creation of SOAP servers and clients that communicate using different transports: sockets, Microsoft Message Queue, the file system, and a custom HTTP listener."
In this one, we find the quote: "The fourth part of the specification defines a binding between SOAP and HTTP. However, this part is also optional. You can use SOAP in combination with any transport protocol or mechanism that is able to transport the SOAP envelope, including SMTP, FTP or even a floppy disk."
At the top of the main developer resources for SOAP page, we find another quote: "SOAP is a lightweight and simple XML-based protocol that is designed to exchange structured and typed information on the Web. The purpose of SOAP is to enable rich and automated Web services based on a shared and open Web infrastructure. SOAP can be used in combination with a variety of existing Internet protocols and formats including HTTP, SMTP, and MIME and can support a wide range of applications from messaging systems to RPC"
But Microsoft is in the workstation and server businesses, and they are better, more profitable growth opportunities for Microsoft than the desktop PC market that they locked up years ago. Why would you assume that companies like Dell can be bullied out of the desktop PC market by MS but not the server and workstation markets?
Your point, that a company that sold mainstream Linux PCs would have a wide-open market to themselves, is absolutely valid. Why is there no such company? Because it's been tried and it doesn't work. There's no market for such a company. To assume that Dell and Gateway don't sell them because of pressure by Microsoft ignores a far more obvious answer.
This type of license has been illegal since 1995
And Dell still sells Linux systems (http://www.dell.com/us/en/esg/topics/linux_003_pr oducts.htm). Why does Microsoft tolerate this situation?
I think the important point is that VA was obviously losing money on their PC business. And remember, this is in spite of a large software cost advantage vis-a-vis most PC vendors. It's perfectly reasonable to assume that major PC vendors also legitimately see no market in Linux desktops.
>>And you hardly had to buy VA Linux hardware to run Linux
Exactly, this dynamic works for Dell and Gateway and IBM too. Why should people buy Linux systems from them when they can home-grow systems?
I've never believed the OS/2 stories, but that's just one company's word against another's. As for Lotus SmartSuite, IBM has always shipped it with their Windows computers and still does.
So now remind me how this is Microsoft's fault...
So you uncritically believed something you read on /.? Dumber than I thought.
Any serious business buyer knew this company existed. It was one of the most famous IPOs of the nut-case Internet era. People knew this company existed and still didn't buy their computers. If you really believe that people didn't know about VA you've got a massive case of denial.
Dell still does offer workstations with Linux you doofus. Did you just assume they didn't? http://www.dell.com/us/en/esg/topics/linux_003_pro ducts.htm
Gateway can assert that Microsoft pressured them, but if there's really a market for Linux desktops then other companies would be offering them and making sales.
So why did VA stop selling Linux systems? Alleged Microsoft pressure on mainstream vendors not to sell Linux should only have made things better for VA, assuming there really was a market for Linux desktops. But the fact is that there is no serious market for Linux desktops.
While we're at it, I simply don't believe that IBM could be subject to such pressure, and yet they too have pretty much abandoned the Linux desktop and notebook business. You used to be able to find Thinkpads for sale on IBM's site with Linux on them, but not anymore. Does anyone seriously believe IBM talked them out of this? Isn't the Occam's Razor answer that they weren't selling?
In fact, stockholders were allowed to vote multiple times and the last vote cast is the one that counts. There's no way that anyone can know the results yet.