If *you* would get it, you would realize that the virus would probably run with your privileges, thus having full access to all your precious files.
This whole thing is 1) a duplication of file access privileges and 2) too complicated to ever get used by common users. (Hell, even ACLs are too damn complicated to get widely used.)
If I create a user "top-secret" and have all my top-secret important documents readable only by that user while doing my normal activities under my normal user, I will have much better security than with this new buzzword-of-the-week scheme.
But in real life, this system changes nothing. If you send a document to somebody, you have to trust this somebody. If this somebody gets hacked or whatever, others will be able to view the document, too.
It worked, but now it stopped working. Most users are pretty happy with Office2K, some are even using Office97 only few have upgraded to OfficeXP (I've read somewhere 11% which looks right).
With computer sales slacking, OpenOffice making inroads and no new useful features, it will be even harder for Microsoft to get people to update.
Until this statement is reversed in some substantial way, with Microsoft cloning things on the Windows side
You mean like multiple desktops?
Or themes?
Or menubar/startbar applets?
Microsoft is already copying a lot from Unix-GUIs on the desktop. Of course the Gates bootlickers will never know because they don't know anything other than Windows so every new feature is invented by Microsoft for them.
Actually it would be better for Microsoft to pay the licenses anyway. The PR-damage and loss of thrust in case of Microsoft's customers having to pay extra fees would hurt them probably more.
Requires Linux 2.5.62 with KDE 3.0 and peer-to-peer upgrade.
(with the subtitling that it doesn't run on windows)
Would someone have made exactly the same comment?
No, someone would have said that the programmers would probably have done something really braindead that requires a kernel upgrade.
And he would be right. KDE software should run on all platforms and be kernel-independent, especially if it's p2p, chat or other IP-based software.
(Yes, that's not what you wanted to hear, I know. You'd rather prefer the old "oh my god, slashdot is soooo bad to poor Microsoft, that is soooo unfair" drivel)
To get back ontopic: The requirement for WinXPSP1 is pure marketing, I'm pretty sure that there is no technical barrier running the program on Win2K.
Isn't Japan and China and the surround areas notorious for software piracy? I mean...if they are already stealing commercial software and using/selling it, why would they give a crap about open source?
Because:
Open Source products are usually more secure than the crap Microsoft puts out and if they aren't you can fix them.
Windows introduces a single point of failure (what if Microsoft decides to discontinue the product? It happened before, they discontinued Windows on Alpha - what guarantees do you have that WinCE on your embedded CPU isn't next? What if Microsoft pulls out features you need? What if Microsoft raises licence costs to insane levels?)
Doing modifications is very beneficial, especially in embedded devices
Japan is not viciously pirating software anyway (but China does)
Even if Japan were massively pirating software they couldn't use pirated software in embedded devices
The only real advantage Windows has is Win32-application compatibility - something most embedded apps don't need. So why use Windows instead of something you can fully control?
So, we'll be trading one monopoly for another and this is a good thing?
First, monopoly means single source. I can get Linux from many different sources (many distributors and directly off the web), so it's no monopoly. I can even create my own Linux-fork and become a source myself. So OSS can by definition never become a real monopoly. On top of that, the open nature of Linux allows competitors to exist. For example a hypothetical Hurd kernel could reuse Linux' drivers and also run Linux' apps (BSD does exactly that already, BTW).
Second, just because Windows will die, doesn't mean that Linux will have 100% marketshare. Possibly there will be BSD, maybe Hurd and other OSS software and probably also Apple still hanging out.
Don't give me the BS about different distributions being choices.
It is no BS.
I thought this whole 'movement' was about choice?
Well, you thought wrong. The movement is about creating good software.
Why are you so adamant about killing off the Windows choice?
First, it doesn't matter wether I want to kill Windows or not. Once it loses domination, it will die, simply because Microsoft can not write all the drivers themselves and doesn't offer any technical advantages over Linux.
Secondly, I don't see any reason why any OS should be protected from the market. If nobody wants Windows anymore, that's it, I don't think it will be missed a lot.
Wrong, SuSE lets you set up a workstation faster and easier than with Windows, even without MS Office which is NOT INCLUDED and requires and EXTRA INSTALL. (OpenOffice is included with SuSE and even RedHat)
Smaller more focused set of default applications
This is an advantage? Oh yeah, I know, "the confusion!"
But wait, Windows runs more apps than Linux - so Windows is great because it runs more and less apps than Linux - at the same time.
SuSE has all of them centralized in the KDE control center. Just because RedHat is a mediocre desktop doesn't mean Linux is.
Also, KDE's control center is organized tree-like. If they wanted to copy Windows, they would just take a random folder and throw all tools into it.
Convenient, standardised help system with excellent searching and troubleshooting options
OK, I give you that. The help system is a little bit lacking on KDE/Linux.
In built support, from time of consumer device launch, for peripherals and card types (PCMCIA, USB etc. - Linux got late to market here).
I already covered that.
Advanced tools are hidden from basic users.
No advantage. Basic users use the defaults. Just because Windows has fewer GUI tools (yes you read that right: You can do a lot more in KDE graphically when in Windows you would have to start registry digging) doesn't mean that's a good thing.
System files are protected from inadvertent change.
Like in Linux if you use users. (Hell, that's what it is for.)
System rescue tools provided on disk (while Linux may die less frequently, when it does there's NO WAY for Joe User to recover).
SuSE came with that for over 3 years.
No confusing messages on startup.
Oh wow, what a great advantage. "The confusion"
I'll give you the help system. The rest is either not true or "the confusion" FUD.
Linux has MANY advantages over Windows and is a technological marvel in some ways, but the sooner people realise Windows *is* better in some departments, the sooner Linux will start to catch up in those ways.
Linux on the desktop depends A LOT on the distributer. RedHat sucks as a desktop (and is indeed worse than Windows in a couple of ways although it has improved lately), SuSE, Xandros and Mandrake shine.
It's about time we had this news. Really, OSS has no chance of competing with software backed by a large company, at least not when the price of the proprietary software are not unreasonable.
Hmmm, Linux is backed by IBM, HP/Compaq, Sony, Sun, SGI, - and pretty much every other big IT-company on the planet minus Microsoft.
The 90% of linux users who use it only because they don't have to pay for it decide they may as well use windows.
Ha! I never paid for Windows, but have already paid a couple of hundred $ for Linux distros in the last years.
Also, if you have 90% marketshare and lower your price to 60% of it was before, even if you go to 100% (which will not happen - see above), you still lost money.
Runs (nearly) all desktopsoftware, because they have 95% marketshare.
Support people are easy to find, because they have 95% marketshare.
If you hire new people they are already familiar with it, because it is so widespread.
All consumer hardware supports it, because it has 95% marketshare
OEMs preinstall Windows because it is so widespread.
All advantages of Windows vs. Linux are a result of it's domination. If you take that away, Windows is dead. The OSS comunity can write most drivers for thousands of different devices and architectures. - Microsoft can't even support Alpha without hand-holding from Compaq, never mind write all the drivers for all those devices!
No. There will not be a lasting coexistance between Windows and something else. Windows will die within a few years once it no longer runs on the majority of desktops.
The pressure on Microsoft is getting bigger. Every year PCs become cheaper and the Microsoft tax represents a bigger and bigger share of OEMs revenues. They have just raised the cost for their corporate customers.
The question is, where shall all the revenue come from? Nobody really needs any MS Office version newer than Office97 and nobody is really excited about Longhorn or however it will be called.
Microsoft knows that they are doomed (that's why Bill Gates and all the other executives with a clue sell thousands of shares each month) and that it's right now just a matter of how much they can milk out of their customerbase.
First, MS Office revenues will be hit and hit hard. OpenOffice does almost anything MS Office can do and it is not more difficult to upgrade from Office97 to OpenOffice than it is to upgrade to OfficeXP. - But a lot cheaper.
Only after an organization has successfully converted to OpenOffice, we will see full conversion to Linux.
Now we'll all have to see what Microsoft does without the hefty MS Office sales... Maybe XBox-gamers will have to pay a lot more because Microsoft can no longer afford losing millions over millions on it?
Comeon, havn't you seem KDE3.1 or Gnome Or OS X , Nice big fat ICONS with frilly bits on the side, even though there an inch and a half square you still can't work out what there ment to represent.
Yeah, I know, absolutely *nothing* can beat a blue "e" in intuitivity. I mean everybody just knows that "e" means "Web Browser", it's just the logical thing. Or a stylish "W" is a Word processor, what else can it be.
Sometimes I really start to think that the rumours about Microsoft paing people to post on various forum sites are true. Either that or some recently introduced and very common food preservative causes brain cancer or senility - or both.
Slashdot Mirror
This whole thing is 1) a duplication of file access privileges and 2) too complicated to ever get used by common users. (Hell, even ACLs are too damn complicated to get widely used.)
If I create a user "top-secret" and have all my top-secret important documents readable only by that user while doing my normal activities under my normal user, I will have much better security than with this new buzzword-of-the-week scheme.
But in real life, this system changes nothing. If you send a document to somebody, you have to trust this somebody. If this somebody gets hacked or whatever, others will be able to view the document, too.
Nothing changes.
With computer sales slacking, OpenOffice making inroads and no new useful features, it will be even harder for Microsoft to get people to update.
You mean like multiple desktops?
Or themes?
Or menubar/startbar applets?
Microsoft is already copying a lot from Unix-GUIs on the desktop. Of course the Gates bootlickers will never know because they don't know anything other than Windows so every new feature is invented by Microsoft for them.
I think the only position that is accepted is to swallow everything that comes out of Redmond without questioning it.
P.S.: The only MS product I use regularily is my keyboard.
Actually it would be better for Microsoft to pay the licenses anyway. The PR-damage and loss of thrust in case of Microsoft's customers having to pay extra fees would hurt them probably more.
Just use any non-RedHat distribution and try it.
(with the subtitling that it doesn't run on windows)
Would someone have made exactly the same comment?
No, someone would have said that the programmers would probably have done something really braindead that requires a kernel upgrade.
And he would be right. KDE software should run on all platforms and be kernel-independent, especially if it's p2p, chat or other IP-based software.
(Yes, that's not what you wanted to hear, I know. You'd rather prefer the old "oh my god, slashdot is soooo bad to poor Microsoft, that is soooo unfair" drivel)
To get back ontopic: The requirement for WinXPSP1 is pure marketing, I'm pretty sure that there is no technical barrier running the program on Win2K.
The least you can do is do some benchmarks and publish them on a website.
Also inform Novell, I guess they could use that information.
This is probably one of the most insightful sentences I have seen lately on slashdot.
Because:
MS never made money with MSN, let alone the MSN portal.
First, monopoly means single source. I can get Linux from many different sources (many distributors and directly off the web), so it's no monopoly. I can even create my own Linux-fork and become a source myself. So OSS can by definition never become a real monopoly. On top of that, the open nature of Linux allows competitors to exist. For example a hypothetical Hurd kernel could reuse Linux' drivers and also run Linux' apps (BSD does exactly that already, BTW).
Second, just because Windows will die, doesn't mean that Linux will have 100% marketshare. Possibly there will be BSD, maybe Hurd and other OSS software and probably also Apple still hanging out.
Don't give me the BS about different distributions being choices.
It is no BS.
I thought this whole 'movement' was about choice?
Well, you thought wrong. The movement is about creating good software.
Why are you so adamant about killing off the Windows choice?
First, it doesn't matter wether I want to kill Windows or not. Once it loses domination, it will die, simply because Microsoft can not write all the drivers themselves and doesn't offer any technical advantages over Linux.
Secondly, I don't see any reason why any OS should be protected from the market. If nobody wants Windows anymore, that's it, I don't think it will be missed a lot.
I'd rather squeeze as much money out of the sheeps now and discontinue the product when it gets unprofitable.
Wrong, SuSE lets you set up a workstation faster and easier than with Windows, even without MS Office which is NOT INCLUDED and requires and EXTRA INSTALL. (OpenOffice is included with SuSE and even RedHat)
Smaller more focused set of default applications
This is an advantage? Oh yeah, I know, "the confusion!"
But wait, Windows runs more apps than Linux - so Windows is great because it runs more and less apps than Linux - at the same time.
Simpler, centralised, graphical configuration tools
SuSE has all of them centralized in the KDE control center. Just because RedHat is a mediocre desktop doesn't mean Linux is.
Also, KDE's control center is organized tree-like. If they wanted to copy Windows, they would just take a random folder and throw all tools into it.
Convenient, standardised help system with excellent searching and troubleshooting options
OK, I give you that. The help system is a little bit lacking on KDE/Linux.
In built support, from time of consumer device launch, for peripherals and card types (PCMCIA, USB etc. - Linux got late to market here).
I already covered that.
Advanced tools are hidden from basic users.
No advantage. Basic users use the defaults. Just because Windows has fewer GUI tools (yes you read that right: You can do a lot more in KDE graphically when in Windows you would have to start registry digging) doesn't mean that's a good thing.
System files are protected from inadvertent change.
Like in Linux if you use users. (Hell, that's what it is for.)
System rescue tools provided on disk (while Linux may die less frequently, when it does there's NO WAY for Joe User to recover).
SuSE came with that for over 3 years.
No confusing messages on startup.
Oh wow, what a great advantage. "The confusion"
I'll give you the help system. The rest is either not true or "the confusion" FUD.
Linux has MANY advantages over Windows and is a technological marvel in some ways, but the sooner people realise Windows *is* better in some departments, the sooner Linux will start to catch up in those ways.
Linux on the desktop depends A LOT on the distributer. RedHat sucks as a desktop (and is indeed worse than Windows in a couple of ways although it has improved lately), SuSE, Xandros and Mandrake shine.
Lower prices mean less revenue and less FUD.
Ah, I see, you mean KDE.
No, Microsoft's "single click here but double click somewhere else" GUI is not consistent at all.
Hmmm, Linux is backed by IBM, HP/Compaq, Sony, Sun, SGI, - and pretty much every other big IT-company on the planet minus Microsoft.
Ha! I never paid for Windows, but have already paid a couple of hundred $ for Linux distros in the last years.
Also, if you have 90% marketshare and lower your price to 60% of it was before, even if you go to 100% (which will not happen - see above), you still lost money.
-
Runs (nearly) all desktopsoftware, because they have 95% marketshare.
-
Support people are easy to find, because they have 95% marketshare.
-
If you hire new people they are already familiar with it, because it is so widespread.
-
All consumer hardware supports it, because it has 95% marketshare
-
OEMs preinstall Windows because it is so widespread.
All advantages of Windows vs. Linux are a result of it's domination. If you take that away, Windows is dead. The OSS comunity can write most drivers for thousands of different devices and architectures. - Microsoft can't even support Alpha without hand-holding from Compaq, never mind write all the drivers for all those devices!No. There will not be a lasting coexistance between Windows and something else. Windows will die within a few years once it no longer runs on the majority of desktops.
The pressure on Microsoft is getting bigger. Every year PCs become cheaper and the Microsoft tax represents a bigger and bigger share of OEMs revenues. They have just raised the cost for their corporate customers.
The question is, where shall all the revenue come from? Nobody really needs any MS Office version newer than Office97 and nobody is really excited about Longhorn or however it will be called.
Microsoft knows that they are doomed (that's why Bill Gates and all the other executives with a clue sell thousands of shares each month) and that it's right now just a matter of how much they can milk out of their customerbase.
Well, if Microsoft starts taking heavly losses, Micorosft stock would evaporate and Bill Gates remaining stock would become worthless.
So because Lindows charges 120$ that means that *all* Linux distributors need to lower prices?
Doesn't make any sense.
Oh, you were just trolling, I forgot.
But even the insanely overpriced Lindows is still 80$ cheaper than a full version of Windows XP home.
Here's my scenario:
First, MS Office revenues will be hit and hit hard. OpenOffice does almost anything MS Office can do and it is not more difficult to upgrade from Office97 to OpenOffice than it is to upgrade to OfficeXP. - But a lot cheaper.
Only after an organization has successfully converted to OpenOffice, we will see full conversion to Linux.
Now we'll all have to see what Microsoft does without the hefty MS Office sales... Maybe XBox-gamers will have to pay a lot more because Microsoft can no longer afford losing millions over millions on it?
Yeah, I know, absolutely *nothing* can beat a blue "e" in intuitivity. I mean everybody just knows that "e" means "Web Browser", it's just the logical thing. Or a stylish "W" is a Word processor, what else can it be.
Sometimes I really start to think that the rumours about Microsoft paing people to post on various forum sites are true. Either that or some recently introduced and very common food preservative causes brain cancer or senility - or both.
Also, the more it will be used, the faster it will hopefully become available in browsers out of the box so we can finally ditch flash...