In 2 years time, I've only seen 1 blue screen of death, and I've been using many different computers using with XP on them and I've installed in many times over that two years.
In 2 years time, I've seen NO blue screens of death, and I've been using many different computers with OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and Linux on them and I've installed them many times over that two years.;-)
When I read the article it struck me that was the oddest way possible of phrasing it. Let's just for a second imagine that it was Macintoshes that were being used to distribute pr0n. You could have written the article exactly the same but then at the bottom put: "Windows and Unix computers are not affected". However, I can't imagine anyone actually doing that. I'd bet that if it had been Macintoshes or Linux machines that were doing this it would have been right in the headline: "Hackers Hijack Linux Computers for Sex Sites".
But I am happy that at least you said that it didn't affect Macintoshes or Unix machines. I have been really annoyed at the TV news because they hardly ever mention even that. I've seen stories when the "I Love You", "Melissa", and whatever others and they said nary a thing about it only affecting Windows PC's. I'm not into the conspiricy theory thing, but I can't help but think that Microsoft spends one heck of a lot of money on television advertising and they might not be too happy if the news was spelling it out loud and clear that it is their software that has all of these vulnerabilities.
I just think it would be better if the public at large had a clue that there are more secure alternatives than Microsoft.
Can't we just fantasize about an alternate universe where the monoculture is of OpenBSD 3.3? It's been released for over two months and so far there are no known security flaws. IIRC there were known exploits for WinXP BEFORE it was released.
After the thrashing that Consumer Reports gave the Lindows pc from WalMart.com in the latest issue, I hope they upgrade (one click?) to 4.0 and give it another go.
Re:If MS were to use such strategies, would anyone
on
Platform Evangelism
·
· Score: 1
1) Assuming the Opera reference is regarding the Hotmail fiasco, I believe the outcome was that there was a bug in Opera that was being accounted for by Hotmail in a specific CSS file. Opera was patched to fix the problem, and so there was a lag between the release and Hotmail being changed to not send the CSS file to the updated browser. If this is the case, and if anyone is to blame, why not look towards the Opera team? I'd have thought that somewhere in a small beta release of the update the issue would have been discovered.
Last I had heard Opera was still pointing the finger at Microsoft. My appologies for not checking for up to date information. Microsoft has a proven track record in this department so it was easy to believe that this was just another in a long list.
2) You comment that you would have been embarrassed to sell a product with 3000 bugs in it. Maybe if you were selling a normal application that has a standard interface to the computer (eg. the Windows API), I would agree. Windows itself does not have the luxury of a standard interface. Its the bit that provides the interface to begin with.
I have actually written a couple of operating systems myself (admittedly smaller than Windows). Most of my career has been spent programming down on bare metal;-) So I am aware that it is more difficult. I still say that if I had sold Windows 95 and it was that buggy, I would have at minimum sold the upgrade for a minimal fee and not full price.
I firmly believe that if Linux hadn't starting competing with Microsoft that the current generation of Windows XP wouldn't be as bug free as it is (at least that's what everybody claims). That's one of the worst things about a monopoly: there is no incentive to provide a quality product. In fact there is a strong incentive to NOT provide a quality product, then all the "pawns" have to spend more money to buy the next version.
This guy's book is just more evidence of what a bad thing it is that Microsoft has a monopoly. It just made me sick reading it. I don't know how these guys can even look at themselves in the mirror every morning.
Re:If MS were to use such strategies, would anyone
on
Platform Evangelism
·
· Score: 1
If MS does this (and they may indeed), this is merely business as usual among many of these corporations. Corporate America is not a day-care facility; companies can and do play hardball
I don't consider making your competitors product appear to be broken to the customer (ala DR-DOS, OS/2, and more recently Opera) "playing hardball". (In polite company) I call that dirty underhanded tricks.
And exclusive licenses with the hardware manufacturers, such that they are not allowed to sell computers with any competitors product (ala BeOS) lest they not be able to sell MS products, goes well beyond hardball IMHO.
If Microsoft had gotten where they are by honestly selling a better product and treating their customers right, I wouldn't feel nearly as bad about their having a monopoly. Instead they sold a crappy product (they even admitted that Windows 95 had over 3000 bugs in it) and ran all of their competition out of business using any devious means possible. And now that they have that monopoly "leverage" it to extract every dime possible out of their customers. If I had sold a product that had 3000 bugs in it, I would have been so embarrased that I would have sent all of my customers an upgrade for free. As opposed to MS raping them a $100 for the upgrade.
This would be like bitching about Ford trying to increase their market share if they donated trucks to organizations that brought meals to the elderly that couldn't get out of the house.
This analogy is flawed in that the NPO getting a Ford truck does not in any way preclude them from also using Chevy, Toyota, Nissan, Dodge or any other brand of truck. Most likely any driver that can drive the Ford can also drive the others. Also the meals they haul in the Ford could just as easily be hauled in the Toyota with no changes to the meals.
However, this is not the case with Windows. Documents produced under Windows will be difficult or impossible to use on any other system. Records stored on those machines will be difficult or impossible to transfer to another system should they decide to change to another system later.
This appears to me to be just a variation on the ploy that they tried to do last year to get out of the legal suits by giving software to schools.
3 - I've seen no evidence that desktop Linux distros are more secure than Windows. Check the sites that cover Linux security, bugs, and updates a little more often. Sure, they don't get hit by viruses as much but I believe that's mainly due to the fact that the viruses are written for Windows. When Linux gets a 30% market share and people start writing viruses for them, then we'll talk. I think Linux developers are discovering that the more any OS can do, the larger the chance for security holes.
While I can agree that Linux is not immune (as I had one of my machines running RedHat 6.2 get infected because I left rpc running). I have been doing e-mail on Linux for over 5 years and have never been hit by an e-mail worm on Linux. Wheras everybody running Windows has had to deal with what, at least a couple dozen, worms (I Love You, Melisa, and so on...). Even if Linux had a 30% share of the market, I don't think it would have as many problems because the e-mail programs don't run executables automagically without asking, the way Outlook (a.k.a. LookOut!!) does.
I have been comparing these three distro's (and Lindows 3.0) on two different machines for the last few weeks. And from the experiences I have had, Mandrake 9.1 has worked the best. One of the machines (a WalMart.com/Microtel/Lindows box) would not install RedHat 9 (RedHat 8.0 would) because the VIA processor caused some test to fail. On the other machine (a Shuttle BareBones system) I had a terrible time installing SuSE (oddly enough SuSE 8.1 would install fine). Mandrake 9.1 installed on both machines without a hitch.
I could use my Epson Printer, Scanner, and digital camera on the Mandrake 9.1 without any messing around. But (after I finally got the SuSE installed) I could not get the scanner to work. I thought I would install the Kooka program but it was nowhere to be found.
However, one of the things I don't like about Mandrake is that they put 'mdk' in all of the RPM names. That has proven to be some grief in the past.
I should also note that I have tried Debian on the BareBones machine and could never get X windows to work. I also had Gentoo running on it for months and really liked Gentoo. I like both Debian and Gentoo a LOT better for keeping things up to date than RPM's. But I have had lots of trouble with them when setting up audio and video cards, scanners, cameras, printers, etc. For example (and the reason I took Gentoo off of the BareBones system) when I added a printer with Gentoo, it turned out I would have had to re-compile the kernel, figured out what modules, and so on. Admittedly I would have learned a lot more doing it that way, but sometimes (for mental health reasons) I just want to plug something in and have it work. No fuss no muss.
I don't see it being that easy. How long (if ever) is it going to be before nVidia supports drivers for Atheos. I don't think Amazon is going to just up and start using Atheos. The big problem with this as I see it is that it will scare the suits that don't understand all of this Unix history nonsense. All they are going to see is that there is something shakey going on with Linux and they had best stick with M$. And if Linux gets a bad rap, what suit is going to trust some other open source thing?
I'm a console programmer and I have to say that it wasn't that easy to get into. I had over 12 years of real-time and low level graphics experience before that. I also knew and had previously worked with several of the people that worked there. I still felt like I really had to work to convince them I was the right person for the job.
Developing jazzy new machines that are deeply integrated with Microsoft products also shores up the company's defenses against the recent arrival of low-priced PCs based on the freely shared Linux operating system.
That's how I interpret this. Given their past history I can't imagine that they will make it easy to run anything but Windoze on it.
I see the settlement with the DOJ has really put an end to monopoly abuse. Since they can't use licensing to stop the hardware guys from installing other OS'es anymore, they'll just make sure the hardware won't run other OS'es.
I think you totally missed my point. I did not say anything about not paying the artists. My point was that the recording industry was ripping them off as well. And I have NEVER downloaded a song (except from the Apple Music Store which I paid for). If I did ever download something without paying for it, I would consider it to be for preview and either delete it or buy it.
but why aren't the benefits of lower production costs being passed on to the consumer?
On this planet the recording industry is pretty well known for being greedy. I feel they have been ripping me off for years. When CD's came out they cost twice what an LP or Cassette did. They said that was because they had to build new plants to produce CD's and as soon as they were built and the quantities went up the prices would come down. Well maybe I blinked and missed it, but I never saw a major reduction and I think $18.99 for a single album is outrageous. I refuse to pay that much for a CD. I usually wait and try to find it in the cut-out or used bins.
A few years ago I was involved in a business that sold used CD's and we did some new CD's. From the distributor we could buy new releases for around $12 and super savers were around $10. I am guessing that the distributor only made a dollar or two so that means that the record company was getting $8-$10 per unit. From having checked into producing a CD I could have one made with quantites of 1000 for less than 2$. Therefore I would bet that they can produce the CD's for less than $1 for quantites > 10,000. So lets say they make $8 per cd. To me that's a pretty good profit margin.
I'm also under the impression that they rip the (non-superstar) artists off.
Bottom Line: I'm not holding my breath waiting for a little savings on production costs to be passed back to me.
I have been very frustrated because all of the music subscription services (listen.com, etc.) only support Windows. Do you think there will be a music subscription service that will work on Linux? With Real just having bought listen.com and since there is a RealPlayer for Linux, do you think they will get listen.com to work on Linux?
Also, I was in the office supply store a couple of days ago looking at all of the different forms (business cards, cd lables, bumper stickers, etc.) which come with Windows/Mac? software. I don't know if Star/OpenOffice has templates for any/some of these. But I was thinking how nice it would be if Linux software was also included on the Windows/Mac CD. Do you see a day when Avery et. al. will include Linux software as well?
But you forgot Security. "Trusted Computing", now that's innovation at it's best!! (Trusted Debian and OpenBSD haven't innovated at all, they are just copies of 20+ year old technology.).
The Licensing 6 program was announced nearly two years ago, and there was a big stink about it. Customers weren't happy. Has that subsided? And do you foresee any further changes?
I think we've learned a lot from the experience, and I think the most important thing is the lesson of consistency.
Microsoft wants as much of their customers money as possible. That's been pretty consistent
Most of the issue was that the new thing was different than the old thing. What we learned is that customers don't want us to change things very often.
Oh yeah! I'll bet they would have gotten a real firestorm of complaints if they had changed the licensing so that it cost their customers half as much.
Whew!, you really had me worried there for a second. But I logged into my machine and FreeBSD is running just fine.
And it appears to me that you left all of the Mac OS X users out of your calculations. There are a million or two of those. Technically aren't they FreeBSD users?
The instant I can't access my account information with Netscape/Mozilla at any of my banks, I'm on the blower. I don't use IE. Period! If any of them ever told me that I had to use IE to access my information I'd close that account so fast it would make their heads swim. So far I've only had a couple of problems and had to call and everytime I have had a satisfactory outcome.
Having used SmallEiffel (the predecessor to SmartEiffel) for several years, I have found that in full checking mode (where it tests all of the require, ensure, invariant, void (null) pointers, etc.) the programs are fairly large. But when you're finished debugging and use the "boost" mode, they aren't significantly larger than an equivilent C++ program.
A couple of years ago I compared (for speed not size) some programs written in both C and SmallEiffel and I found that the Eiffel ones were about 1.3 to 1.4 X the C ones. And I have heard that the generated code has been improved since then, so it should be better than that now.
I should also comment that Small/SmartEiffel compiles to C VERY fast. It will take Gcc far more time to compile the C files into.o's.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
In 2 years time, I've only seen 1 blue screen of death, and I've been using many different computers using with XP on them and I've installed in many times over that two years.
In 2 years time, I've seen NO blue screens of death, and I've been using many different computers with OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and Linux on them and I've installed them many times over that two years. ;-)
Oops! I linked to the wrong article on news.com in my reply above. The article I intended to link to is: http://news.com.com/2100-1002_3-1024178.html.
Isn't that true of *any* solid server OS?
There's always those virus/worm/exploit things. It's my observation that Windows has quite a few.
It looks like the latest FreeBSD (4.8) has a one and the previous release (4.7) had a few.
The last OpenBSD (3.2) had 14. The new version of OpenBSD (3.3) has been out for over 2 months and doesn't have any yet. That's pretty impressive.
Interesting that several of the flaws in FreeBSD and OpenBSD are the same bug.
When I read the article it struck me that was the oddest way possible of phrasing it. Let's just for a second imagine that it was Macintoshes that were being used to distribute pr0n. You could have written the article exactly the same but then at the bottom put: "Windows and Unix computers are not affected". However, I can't imagine anyone actually doing that. I'd bet that if it had been Macintoshes or Linux machines that were doing this it would have been right in the headline: "Hackers Hijack Linux Computers for Sex Sites".
But I am happy that at least you said that it didn't affect Macintoshes or Unix machines. I have been really annoyed at the TV news because they hardly ever mention even that. I've seen stories when the "I Love You", "Melissa", and whatever others and they said nary a thing about it only affecting Windows PC's. I'm not into the conspiricy theory thing, but I can't help but think that Microsoft spends one heck of a lot of money on television advertising and they might not be too happy if the news was spelling it out loud and clear that it is their software that has all of these vulnerabilities.I just think it would be better if the public at large had a clue that there are more secure alternatives than Microsoft.
Can't we just fantasize about an alternate universe where the monoculture is of OpenBSD 3.3? It's been released for over two months and so far there are no known security flaws. IIRC there were known exploits for WinXP BEFORE it was released.
After the thrashing that Consumer Reports gave the Lindows pc from WalMart.com in the latest issue, I hope they upgrade (one click?) to 4.0 and give it another go.
1) Assuming the Opera reference is regarding the Hotmail fiasco, I believe the outcome was that there was a bug in Opera that was being accounted for by Hotmail in a specific CSS file. Opera was patched to fix the problem, and so there was a lag between the release and Hotmail being changed to not send the CSS file to the updated browser. If this is the case, and if anyone is to blame, why not look towards the Opera team? I'd have thought that somewhere in a small beta release of the update the issue would have been discovered.
Last I had heard Opera was still pointing the finger at Microsoft. My appologies for not checking for up to date information. Microsoft has a proven track record in this department so it was easy to believe that this was just another in a long list.
2) You comment that you would have been embarrassed to sell a product with 3000 bugs in it. Maybe if you were selling a normal application that has a standard interface to the computer (eg. the Windows API), I would agree. Windows itself does not have the luxury of a standard interface. Its the bit that provides the interface to begin with.
I have actually written a couple of operating systems myself (admittedly smaller than Windows). Most of my career has been spent programming down on bare metal ;-) So I am aware that it is more difficult. I still say that if I had sold Windows 95 and it was that buggy, I would have at minimum sold the upgrade for a minimal fee and not full price.
I firmly believe that if Linux hadn't starting competing with Microsoft that the current generation of Windows XP wouldn't be as bug free as it is (at least that's what everybody claims). That's one of the worst things about a monopoly: there is no incentive to provide a quality product. In fact there is a strong incentive to NOT provide a quality product, then all the "pawns" have to spend more money to buy the next version.
This guy's book is just more evidence of what a bad thing it is that Microsoft has a monopoly. It just made me sick reading it. I don't know how these guys can even look at themselves in the mirror every morning.
If MS does this (and they may indeed), this is merely business as usual among many of these corporations. Corporate America is not a day-care facility; companies can and do play hardball
I don't consider making your competitors product appear to be broken to the customer (ala DR-DOS, OS/2, and more recently Opera) "playing hardball". (In polite company) I call that dirty underhanded tricks.
And exclusive licenses with the hardware manufacturers, such that they are not allowed to sell computers with any competitors product (ala BeOS) lest they not be able to sell MS products, goes well beyond hardball IMHO.
If Microsoft had gotten where they are by honestly selling a better product and treating their customers right, I wouldn't feel nearly as bad about their having a monopoly. Instead they sold a crappy product (they even admitted that Windows 95 had over 3000 bugs in it) and ran all of their competition out of business using any devious means possible. And now that they have that monopoly "leverage" it to extract every dime possible out of their customers. If I had sold a product that had 3000 bugs in it, I would have been so embarrased that I would have sent all of my customers an upgrade for free. As opposed to MS raping them a $100 for the upgrade.
This would be like bitching about Ford trying to increase their market share if they donated trucks to organizations that brought meals to the elderly that couldn't get out of the house.
This analogy is flawed in that the NPO getting a Ford truck does not in any way preclude them from also using Chevy, Toyota, Nissan, Dodge or any other brand of truck. Most likely any driver that can drive the Ford can also drive the others. Also the meals they haul in the Ford could just as easily be hauled in the Toyota with no changes to the meals.
However, this is not the case with Windows. Documents produced under Windows will be difficult or impossible to use on any other system. Records stored on those machines will be difficult or impossible to transfer to another system should they decide to change to another system later.
This appears to me to be just a variation on the ploy that they tried to do last year to get out of the legal suits by giving software to schools.
3 - I've seen no evidence that desktop Linux distros are more secure than Windows. Check the sites that cover Linux security, bugs, and updates a little more often. Sure, they don't get hit by viruses as much but I believe that's mainly due to the fact that the viruses are written for Windows. When Linux gets a 30% market share and people start writing viruses for them, then we'll talk. I think Linux developers are discovering that the more any OS can do, the larger the chance for security holes.
While I can agree that Linux is not immune (as I had one of my machines running RedHat 6.2 get infected because I left rpc running). I have been doing e-mail on Linux for over 5 years and have never been hit by an e-mail worm on Linux. Wheras everybody running Windows has had to deal with what, at least a couple dozen, worms (I Love You, Melisa, and so on...). Even if Linux had a 30% share of the market, I don't think it would have as many problems because the e-mail programs don't run executables automagically without asking, the way Outlook (a.k.a. LookOut!!) does.
I have been comparing these three distro's (and Lindows 3.0) on two different machines for the last few weeks. And from the experiences I have had, Mandrake 9.1 has worked the best. One of the machines (a WalMart.com/Microtel/Lindows box) would not install RedHat 9 (RedHat 8.0 would) because the VIA processor caused some test to fail. On the other machine (a Shuttle BareBones system) I had a terrible time installing SuSE (oddly enough SuSE 8.1 would install fine). Mandrake 9.1 installed on both machines without a hitch.
I could use my Epson Printer, Scanner, and digital camera on the Mandrake 9.1 without any messing around. But (after I finally got the SuSE installed) I could not get the scanner to work. I thought I would install the Kooka program but it was nowhere to be found.
However, one of the things I don't like about Mandrake is that they put 'mdk' in all of the RPM names. That has proven to be some grief in the past.
I should also note that I have tried Debian on the BareBones machine and could never get X windows to work. I also had Gentoo running on it for months and really liked Gentoo. I like both Debian and Gentoo a LOT better for keeping things up to date than RPM's. But I have had lots of trouble with them when setting up audio and video cards, scanners, cameras, printers, etc. For example (and the reason I took Gentoo off of the BareBones system) when I added a printer with Gentoo, it turned out I would have had to re-compile the kernel, figured out what modules, and so on. Admittedly I would have learned a lot more doing it that way, but sometimes (for mental health reasons) I just want to plug something in and have it work. No fuss no muss.
Anyway when (if?) I get my review done it will be at http://www.qrwsoftware.com/rants/shootout.html.
I don't see it being that easy. How long (if ever) is it going to be before nVidia supports drivers for Atheos. I don't think Amazon is going to just up and start using Atheos. The big problem with this as I see it is that it will scare the suits that don't understand all of this Unix history nonsense. All they are going to see is that there is something shakey going on with Linux and they had best stick with M$. And if Linux gets a bad rap, what suit is going to trust some other open source thing?
I'm a console programmer and I have to say that it wasn't that easy to get into. I had over 12 years of real-time and low level graphics experience before that. I also knew and had previously worked with several of the people that worked there. I still felt like I really had to work to convince them I was the right person for the job.
Developing jazzy new machines that are deeply integrated with Microsoft products also shores up the company's defenses against the recent arrival of low-priced PCs based on the freely shared Linux operating system.
That's how I interpret this. Given their past history I can't imagine that they will make it easy to run anything but Windoze on it.
I see the settlement with the DOJ has really put an end to monopoly abuse. Since they can't use licensing to stop the hardware guys from installing other OS'es anymore, they'll just make sure the hardware won't run other OS'es.
I think you totally missed my point. I did not say anything about not paying the artists. My point was that the recording industry was ripping them off as well. And I have NEVER downloaded a song (except from the Apple Music Store which I paid for). If I did ever download something without paying for it, I would consider it to be for preview and either delete it or buy it.
but why aren't the benefits of lower production costs being passed on to the consumer?
On this planet the recording industry is pretty well known for being
greedy. I feel they have been ripping me off for years. When CD's came out they cost twice what an LP or Cassette did. They said that was because they had to build new plants to produce CD's and as soon as they were built and the quantities went up the prices would come down. Well maybe I blinked and missed it, but I never saw a major reduction and I think $18.99 for a single album is outrageous. I refuse to pay that much for a CD. I usually wait and try to find it in the cut-out or used bins.
A few years ago I was involved in a business that sold used CD's and we did some new CD's. From the distributor we could buy new releases for around $12 and super savers were around $10. I am guessing that the distributor only made a dollar or two so that means that the record company was getting $8-$10 per unit. From having checked into producing a CD I could have one made with quantites of 1000 for less than 2$. Therefore I would bet that they can produce the CD's for less than $1 for quantites > 10,000. So lets say they make $8 per cd. To me that's a pretty good profit margin.
I'm also under the impression that they rip the (non-superstar)
artists off.
Bottom Line: I'm not holding my breath waiting for a little savings on production costs to be passed back to me.
I have been very frustrated because all of the music subscription services (listen.com, etc.) only support Windows. Do you think there will be a music subscription service that will work on Linux? With Real just having bought listen.com and since there is a RealPlayer for Linux, do you think they will get listen.com to work on Linux?
Also, I was in the office supply store a couple of days ago looking at all of the different forms (business cards, cd lables, bumper stickers, etc.) which come with Windows/Mac? software. I don't know if Star/OpenOffice has templates for any/some of these. But I was thinking how nice it would be if Linux software was also included on the Windows/Mac CD. Do you see a day when Avery et. al. will include Linux software as well?
But you forgot Security. "Trusted Computing", now that's innovation at it's best!! (Trusted Debian and OpenBSD haven't innovated at all, they are just copies of 20+ year old technology.).
The Licensing 6 program was announced nearly two years ago, and there was a big stink about it. Customers weren't happy. Has that subsided? And do you foresee any further changes?
I think we've learned a lot from the experience, and I think the most important thing is the lesson of consistency.
Microsoft wants as much of their customers money as possible. That's been pretty consistent
Most of the issue was that the new thing was different than the old thing. What we learned is that customers don't want us to change things very often.
Oh yeah! I'll bet they would have gotten a real firestorm of complaints if they had changed the licensing so that it cost their customers half as much.
Whew!, you really had me worried there for a second. But I logged into my machine and FreeBSD is running just fine.
And it appears to me that you left all of the Mac OS X users out of your calculations. There are a million or two of those. Technically aren't they FreeBSD users?
The instant I can't access my account information with Netscape/Mozilla at any of my banks, I'm on the blower. I don't use IE. Period! If any of them ever told me that I had to use IE to access my information I'd close that account so fast it would make their heads swim. So far I've only had a couple of problems and had to call and everytime I have had a satisfactory outcome.
There are various attempts at it (I did one myself), but last I checked you had to use the boehm gc.
There is actually a book that compares Eiffel, C++, and Java: Objects Unencapsulated: Java, Eiffel, and C++ by Ian Joyner.
Having used SmallEiffel (the predecessor to SmartEiffel) for several years, I have found that in full checking mode (where it tests all of the require, ensure, invariant, void (null) pointers, etc.) the programs are fairly large. But when you're finished debugging and use the "boost" mode, they aren't significantly larger than an equivilent C++ program.
A couple of years ago I compared (for speed not size) some programs written in both C and SmallEiffel and I found that the Eiffel ones were about 1.3 to 1.4 X the C ones. And I have heard that the generated code has been improved since then, so it should be better than that now.
I should also comment that Small/SmartEiffel compiles to C VERY fast. It will take Gcc far more time to compile the C files into .o's. ;-)