Now that Microsoft has released all the documentation, won't it be easier for them to sue commercial open-source projects? Is there a legal difference between reverse-engineering protocols to make a clean-room implementation and using the documentation provided by Microsoft, but that comes with a license?
Is this a new technique to reduce the total number of patches they put out? They wait until 4-5 vulnerabilities come out before coming out with a patch. That way, they can say "in 2002, linux had 60 security patches, we only had 56".
Slashdot Mirror
Nice patch d00d!
It comes pre-loaded with Ubuntu.
More info here:
http://blog.dustinkirkland.com/2009/07/dell-mini9-server-and-dell-mini10v.html
Now that Microsoft has released all the documentation, won't it be easier for them to sue commercial open-source projects? Is there a legal difference between reverse-engineering protocols to make a clean-room implementation and using the documentation provided by Microsoft, but that comes with a license?
Even phishers like Linux better than Windows!
Where does it say it's going to be a 360 exclusive?
So what will everyone do when ClamAV starts charging a subscription fee for updates like Nessus and Snort started doing?
Right now, there are about 8 or 9 post-sp3 hotfixes. And sp3 just came out.
Most distributions already have this. Red Hat has the Red Hat Network. 3 Service Packs for Windows 2000, but hundreds of hotfixes...
Is this a new technique to reduce the total number of patches they put out? They wait until 4-5 vulnerabilities come out before coming out with a patch. That way, they can say "in 2002, linux had 60 security patches, we only had 56".
The new system runs on Sun Solaris with off-the-shelf hardware. If it runs on Solaris...it can run on Linux...