Because MS owns a nice chunk of Apple, it's in their best interest.
Also, you have to look at the fact that people who use macs are very unlikely to buy into the Windows/PC market. MS has provided mac users with the ms-office suite for quite some time.
We all know how MS feels about Linux.
True, but (and I'm probably going to get modded down for this), Linux != unix. Perhaps, MS will extend the OSes they offer MS-Office to the Solaris and BSD systems(they already have IE for Solaris).
Think about this. It would only increase their sales of Office, as there are systems out there that would never run MS-Windows, either because the hardware isn't supported, or for religious reasons. And if they made installation "difficult" enough, they could ensure that MS-Office for freeBSD didn't convince people to get rid of their lovely XP.
Does the *nix community need MS-Office? Not **need**, but I'd say **want pretty badly** would sum it up. If you disagree, look at how many hr dept's want you to send your resume in ms-word format. Word for *nix would also mean more support for printers.
Actually, if you want to be technical, it's more a trojan than a virus. Viruses (or virii) attach themselves to legetimate code or otherwise alter it, replicate, decimate, etc. Trojans APPEAR to be legitimate code, and do nasty stuff upon execution. This latest outbreak isn't anything legit, and doesn't infect other files.
Personally, I think labeling all malware as "viruses |viren | virii" is as irritating as calling crackers "hackers" and referring to IRC as "mIRC", and is doubleplus-ungood anyway.
I have know idea why he used the phrase 'network-based, remote' Is there some other remote way of talking to Microsoft computers? Some radio signal you can send that
instantly gives you full access?
You! Who told you about that feature? You are in violation of M$'s "security by obscurity" policy! That's ANOTHER patch we have to release this week! Don't you realize that those monkeys get expensive after a while, and there's no volume discount?
I say that Linux and Windows cannot be directly compared (IMHO)
I never compared the two. I just made a simple anology, much akin to the one posted in the interview. I just happen to think mine is more correct.
But nevertheless, in terms of functionality, Linux is not very user friendly (you have to do lots of steps) in order to reduce the faults in the system (whether security or stability.)
Strictly speaking, your average Linux OOB(out of box) experience is safer than your average Windows OOB experience. I recieve daily trojan emails, but see nothing in my ftpd logs.
Microsoft on the other hand wants every user will be able to use a PC even though it is their first time to use one. In the process of doing that, if you disable all features (because of security) then nobody will buy their OS since I believe their support call center will be full 100% of the time.
Be able to, be forced to, what's the difference, right? There has to be a certain expectation of knowledge.
Also, there's a difference between useful and secure. M$ may have done a bad thing when they allowed.doc files to contain machine level code. They're paying the price for that now. Many email services just outright BLOCK.doc files now. I bet that interferes with functionality.
It's funny you mention that nobody would buy their OS if it were secure.
Q: . . . things like . . . making e-mail attachments executable.
A: I think that picture has changed. Once again, we've been developing stuff based on ease-of-use for the customer . . . it goes back to a physical analogy. If I leave my keys in my car because it's convenient for me, and somebody steals my car, is that my fault?
No, it's not. But if the Foo Car Company set all their remote locks to open when you clap your hands thrice, for "when your hands are filled with grocery bags, to save you from searching your pockets for the key", and only allowed this to be disabled by opening the hood and clipping the red wire with the blue tracer, I'd say they would be responsible for my aunt's CDs disappearing.
Opening the hood and clipping a wire is farther than most people want to go when it comes to modifications. I'd even wager that it is more than many drivers are capable of. Searching around in the "control panel" is further than your average MS-Outlook user is likey to feel comfortable with. They are afraid of "breaking" things.
The car keys are in the user interface portion of the car, I guess my point is. It's "easy" to remove them, put them in your pocket, to provent unauthorized use. How "easy" is it to disable the trojan propigation in Outlook?
Preach on, brother. This has been my biggest problem with spammers to date. You (or a newsgroup) gets spammed, you do the right thing and send an email to
abuse@domain.com (headers et al) and they do NOTHING.
I change the title of the message to something like "please deal with [lusername]" and **forward** the spam to the following addresses:
root@ abuse@ service@ sales@ support@ techsupport@ admin@ help@
As long as the scientists alter the genes somewhat to make the tiger unable to synthesize certain ammino acids. We don't want these things just running around rampant, what with cloning new and all.
Send your friends some streams of/dev/random They'll waste a few cpu-hours trying to decrypt each. If everyone did this, all monitoring of traffic would either be very expensive or very worthless.
Start secret message:
s^O(^S^XltkA@[1^Z;
end secret message
It's a little ironic that Bush strips away people's rights in order to protect them.
It's all fitting with the principals of Ingsoc.
Ignorance is Stregnth
Freedom Is Slavery
War is Peace
MS users: I wouldn't leave your microphone plugged in while not in use and online. Same with webcams. Remember, they can search without telling you, so hacking a winbox probably isn't beyond the scope of an investigation.
Actually, the difference is that.Net and Passport are opt-in measures that you can avoid. I never signed anything saying that Equifax could have my credit information, but I bet they do.
Never? Then you must not have a bank acct, credit card, phone, any utilities in your name? I suggest you read the fine print on those contracts you signed when you aquired these things. If you have any credit information(which you implied you did), equifax has it.
Only thing is, advertising on the net
simply doesn't work
Here's my bitch about "online ads don't work"
How many times have you seen an ad for the new Ford SUV, went out, and bought one, that very same day? That's what I thought.
Secondly, What are most online ads for? What purpose does "punch the monkey" serve? "You've got a message waiting for you?" WTF? I have to admit, ads are getting better, more of them are targeted for the probable audience.
Perhaps we should look back to the way ads were done in the past. There's no reason you can't pay for a site with ads, if you're smart. Newspapers do it(I mean, they put out the dead-tree versions, and sell them for the price of transportation, and so they're not "free", "free" newspapers have a bad reputation).
X10: Might be more popular if the ads weren't so damn annoying. Kind of like the kids in the smucker's commercials. They get name recognition, but for all the wrong reasons.
Name recognition is what people should be going for. Have the product up front, or an accurate description. The Scranton Times has a good example of what I call "Good Ads". They are of relevance to the site reader, spell out what they are for, and aren't intrusive. Kind of like the ads on/. I really don't have a problem with the block ads in the middle of the pages, either. Easy to read around.
If you don't like looking at ads, I suggest you use lynx as your browser. Most of them just come up as click here
This is an EXCELLENT point. Today I was at work, talking with my boss(who lives about a mile from me, the way the crow flies), who can't get a file off of his A drive. Can't figure it out for the life of him. Another co-worker, who got his computer infected with an email exploit, and ended up paying $45 to get it fixed. I'm sure these stories are typical. It might also get people interested in the open source movement(I didn't know there was a guy over in the west side of town that was a BSD freak!).
Also, the Scranton newspaper owns several radio stations. They could ahve their newspaper site on the NAN, seeing as they already have a convienient transmitting location. Would make the site more accessable for locals.
Not only is making the ISP responsible wrong, it sets a dangerous precident.
Would that make the telephone companies responsible for traffic that travels on their lines? Would it make the postal service responsible for the sending of pirated tapes thru the mail?
I'd really like for someone to explain how this is different.
If FaceIt were running on Denver and have the Center City Rapist's photo in the db, that guy would have been caught because of his high profile from Philly and perhaps one
young woman would still be alive today because of FaceIt.
And if we had national ID cards cross ref'ed with our dna that needed to be punched at all state lines, we would have caught him too. Are you in favor of that? How about, if people weren't allowed on the streets after 9pm, unless they had papers from work stating they needed to be there? Where does it end?
Slashdot Mirror
Because MS owns a nice chunk of Apple, it's in their best interest.
Also, you have to look at the fact that people who use macs are very unlikely to buy into the Windows/PC market. MS has provided mac users with the ms-office suite for quite some time.
We all know how MS feels about Linux.
True, but (and I'm probably going to get modded down for this), Linux != unix. Perhaps, MS will extend the OSes they offer MS-Office to the Solaris and BSD systems(they already have IE for Solaris).
Think about this. It would only increase their sales of Office, as there are systems out there that would never run MS-Windows, either because the hardware isn't supported, or for religious reasons. And if they made installation "difficult" enough, they could ensure that MS-Office for freeBSD didn't convince people to get rid of their lovely XP.
Does the *nix community need MS-Office? Not **need**, but I'd say **want pretty badly** would sum it up. If you disagree, look at how many hr dept's want you to send your resume in ms-word format. Word for *nix would also mean more support for printers.
use "viruses". please, for the love of god.
Actually, if you want to be technical, it's more a trojan than a virus. Viruses (or virii) attach themselves to legetimate code or otherwise alter it, replicate, decimate, etc. Trojans APPEAR to be legitimate code, and do nasty stuff upon execution. This latest outbreak isn't anything legit, and doesn't infect other files.
Personally, I think labeling all malware as "viruses |viren | virii" is as irritating as calling crackers "hackers" and referring to IRC as "mIRC", and is doubleplus-ungood anyway.
I have know idea why he used the phrase 'network-based, remote' Is there some other remote way of talking to Microsoft computers? Some radio signal you can send that
instantly gives you full access?
You! Who told you about that feature? You are in violation of M$'s "security by obscurity" policy! That's ANOTHER patch we have to release this week! Don't you realize that those monkeys get expensive after a while, and there's no volume discount?
=)
I say that Linux and Windows cannot be directly compared (IMHO)
.doc files to contain machine level code. They're paying the price for that now. Many email services just outright BLOCK .doc files now. I bet that interferes with functionality.
I never compared the two. I just made a simple anology, much akin to the one posted in the interview. I just happen to think mine is more correct.
But nevertheless, in terms of functionality, Linux is not very user friendly (you have to do lots of steps) in order to reduce the faults in the system (whether security or stability.)
Strictly speaking, your average Linux OOB(out of box) experience is safer than your average Windows OOB experience. I recieve daily trojan emails, but see nothing in my ftpd logs.
Microsoft on the other hand wants every user will be able to use a PC even though it is their first time to use one. In the process of doing that, if you disable all features (because of security) then nobody will buy their OS since I believe their support call center will be full 100% of the time.
Be able to, be forced to, what's the difference, right? There has to be a certain expectation of knowledge.
Also, there's a difference between useful and secure. M$ may have done a bad thing when they allowed
It's funny you mention that nobody would buy their OS if it were secure.
Q: . . . things like . . . making e-mail attachments executable.
A: I think that picture has changed. Once again, we've been developing stuff based on ease-of-use for the customer . . . it goes back to a physical analogy. If I leave my keys in my car because it's convenient for me, and somebody steals my car, is that my fault?
No, it's not. But if the Foo Car Company set all their remote locks to open when you clap your hands thrice, for "when your hands are filled with grocery bags, to save you from searching your pockets for the key", and only allowed this to be disabled by opening the hood and clipping the red wire with the blue tracer, I'd say they would be responsible for my aunt's CDs disappearing.
Opening the hood and clipping a wire is farther than most people want to go when it comes to modifications. I'd even wager that it is more than many drivers are capable of. Searching around in the "control panel" is further than your average MS-Outlook user is likey to feel comfortable with. They are afraid of "breaking" things.
The car keys are in the user interface portion of the car, I guess my point is. It's "easy" to remove them, put them in your pocket, to provent unauthorized use. How "easy" is it to disable the trojan propigation in Outlook?
Preach on, brother. This has been my biggest problem with spammers to date. You (or a newsgroup) gets spammed, you do the right thing and send an email to
abuse@domain.com (headers et al) and they do NOTHING.
I change the title of the message to something like "please deal with [lusername]" and **forward** the spam to the following addresses:
root@ abuse@ service@ sales@ support@ techsupport@ admin@ help@
I recieve very little spam.
So who is liable if I use open source software?
I think the linux community will offer you a 200% refund(based on the GPL-suggested retail price).
As long as the scientists alter the genes somewhat to make the tiger unable to synthesize certain ammino acids. We don't want these things just running around rampant, what with cloning new and all.
I don't see what's so difficult about the .com buisness model:
1) Make a website
2) ?????
3) BIG PROFIT!
it's not that hard, really!
You might want to check out #nethack on either undernet or efnet, they're both good resources for the game.
Also, I don't know if anyone's mentioned it yet, but rec.games.rougelike.nethack is another great place to go to read about strategy.
Start secret message:
s^O(^S^XltkA@[1^Z;
end secret message
It's all fitting with the principals of Ingsoc.
Ignorance is Stregnth
Freedom Is Slavery
War is Peace
MS users: I wouldn't leave your microphone plugged in while not in use and online. Same with webcams. Remember, they can search without telling you, so hacking a winbox probably isn't beyond the scope of an investigation.
Actually, the difference is that .Net and Passport are opt-in measures that you can avoid. I never signed anything saying that Equifax could have my credit information, but I bet they do.
Never? Then you must not have a bank acct, credit card, phone, any utilities in your name? I suggest you read the fine print on those contracts you signed when you aquired these things. If you have any credit information(which you implied you did), equifax has it.
Only thing is, advertising on the net
/. I really don't have a problem with the block ads in the middle of the pages, either. Easy to read around.
simply doesn't work
Here's my bitch about "online ads don't work"
How many times have you seen an ad for the new Ford SUV, went out, and bought one, that very same day? That's what I thought.
Secondly, What are most online ads for? What purpose does "punch the monkey" serve? "You've got a message waiting for you?" WTF? I have to admit, ads are getting better, more of them are targeted for the probable audience.
Perhaps we should look back to the way ads were done in the past. There's no reason you can't pay for a site with ads, if you're smart. Newspapers do it(I mean, they put out the dead-tree versions, and sell them for the price of transportation, and so they're not "free", "free" newspapers have a bad reputation).
X10: Might be more popular if the ads weren't so damn annoying. Kind of like the kids in the smucker's commercials. They get name recognition, but for all the wrong reasons.
Name recognition is what people should be going for. Have the product up front, or an accurate description. The Scranton Times has a good example of what I call "Good Ads". They are of relevance to the site reader, spell out what they are for, and aren't intrusive. Kind of like the ads on
If you don't like looking at ads, I suggest you use lynx as your browser. Most of them just come up as click here
Can't you use a digital camera to take pictures of copywrighted materials, such as books? How do you
make a camera tell the difference?
Or will they just outlaw books =)
Also, the Scranton newspaper owns several radio stations. They could ahve their newspaper site on the NAN, seeing as they already have a convienient transmitting location. Would make the site more accessable for locals.
How long til they outlaw that encryption, saying it can be used for terrorists to create their own private wireless network?
Not only is making the ISP responsible wrong, it sets a dangerous precident.
Would that make the telephone companies responsible for traffic that travels on their lines? Would it make the postal service responsible for the sending of pirated tapes thru the mail?
I'd really like for someone to explain how this is different.
young woman would still be alive today because of FaceIt.
And if we had national ID cards cross ref'ed with our dna that needed to be punched at all state lines, we would have caught him too. Are you in favor of that? How about, if people weren't allowed on the streets after 9pm, unless they had papers from work stating they needed to be there? Where does it end?