I laughed. At first I laughed because I wasn't at the company meeting, so I thought the commercial was real and quite ridiculous. After I found out the truth, I laughed because it was clever -- and hey, how many CEOs are willing to make fun of themselves like that. Now, I laugh because slashdot fell for it, like I did.
Then again, being on the inside of a company that fulfills me intellectually with a dizzying variety of possible projects to work for, almost daily seminars on one topic or another, and the knowledge that my code will be run by millions of people, might make me a little more ready to have a good time and laugh.
/if the parent isn't flamebait, then neither am I, right?:)
I've always wondered how much browser dominance really matters to Microsoft. IE comes bundled w/ their OS, so even if everyone runs Mozilla, they still have IE in their system, and all the other MS apps (and many others) still leverage IE's plugability into other client software. So in terms of lock-in to the platform, there's still all the web enabled client apps out there (like most MS products).
Seriously, we have an interesting mix of young up-and-comers, and old-hats. There's such variety in projects, and moving is easy enough, so if you want to dedicate 20 years to a particular topic, or move around every few years, it can all be done within the confines of the company. The place is not going away any time soon, either.
Notice I said Desktop User. Maybe I should have clarified further and said Home user. There's a few notable commercial apps for linux, like AliasWavefront's Maya, or the slew of commercial server products, but these aren't the kind of software a home user would buy.
The only problem is, as much as Linux is slowlu chipping away at their market share, MS continues to bring in more and more cash each year (from 2003 - 2004 their profits increased by 11 billion). What reason would they possibly have to drop their current model and embrace OSS?
I'm not passing a value judgement on free vs. commercial software. But we're talking about a capitalist market here. Windows is a platform that offers hundreds of millions of users willing to shell out some money for their software. Linux offers a platform where the companies can give their software away. Hence you will see many more companies targeting Windows, and to a lesser extent OSX, in lieu of developing for Linux.
And how much are they charging for their applications?
You cite three huge service companies. Their business model allows them to not make any money with their software in exchange for wide adoption and income through other means, such as support and services. And it's not even working out that great for Sun and Novell, who are both in economic trouble.
The software market in general is hardly ready or willing to offer it's software for free. The Linux Desktop user seem to require it be free. Hence the commercial software market in general will be reluctant to adopt Linux.
willing to pay?
on
Linux, Inc.
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The turning point for Linux will only come when desktop Linux users become willing to pay money for software on linux; non Open Source software at that.
With great OSS projects like Open Office, Gimp, and others, Linux desktop users have become accustomed a totally free desktop, and dislike free solutions that only provide binaries. This is not a very inviting environment for commercial companies to jump in, given the effort porting would take, and given Linux's penetration into the Desktop market (not meager, but not massive either).
Administrators still have access to change permissions back. So just browse to the file in question, right click, select 'security', and add Administrator back in w/ read rights.
The smarter thing would be to run your daily account as a regular User (not Administrator) and then programs would not have access, but you could easily run apps as Administrator (using runas...") when you need a access.
Oh, and for those apps that suck and require admin priviledges, you can shield yourself slightly by still running your account as User, and running only the offending application as Administrator. This can be done quite easily using runas.
It's very true. But not the fault of Windows. Applications can be written with user priviledges in mind. For example, I was pleasantly surprised recently when I installed Nero v6 and it installed a configurable CD burning service for non-Administrators. Thankfully most of the big ones work (most MS apps, Adobe Apps, Macromedia Apps, Mozilla).
I personally thing it's about time users demand that software makers stop coding applications that require admin access simply to run. That's unheard of in linux/unix.
*runs regedit, tries to modify system registry keys -- ACCESS DENIED*
*runs setup.exe, windows prompts for administrator password, I don't provide it -- ACCESS DENIED*
*try to delete or modify a file on C:\Windows, or C:\Program Files\ -- ACCESS DENIED*
*go into Hardware > Device Manager , tries to change hardware settings -- ACCESS DENIED*
etc...
I dunno... seems to be working pretty well from here.
Don't confuse users choosing to run as root as having a failing privilidge system. Remove your account from the Administrator group and into the User group, and you'll see how extensive the privilidge system is. Conversely, use root as your daily linux account and see how much protection that gives you.
Outlook has a setting that says 'warn me when other applications try to send e-mail as me', which is on in by default on SP2 and stops scripts like MyDoom. If the user is running as Limited User, the script is prevented from changing system settings or installing itself on the machine. Maybe the IT department should be liable and not Microsoft?
Just to note, one could easily write a MyDoom for linux. Search for.thunderbird/,.evolution/, etc... in the user's home directory, parse the address book, then pipe all the addresses one by one through mail -s 'message' address. Things like that don't happen because as a rule Linux users are much more knowledgeble and would never click on an unkown attachment. Just running linux doesn't make you secure, but it sure does imply you are more technically saavy.
I'm sorry for being daft but on the honeypot site I can't find the specific article everyone is talking about. I'd comment more on their study if I knew what they were running. Is the unpatched linux distribution as old as the unpatched XP SP1 they are using, and Solaris?
I'd like to see benchmarks of fully patched systems. I would also like to see server systems (OSX server, win2k3, etc...) being tested.
But more importantly, I'd like to see the number of attempts on each box. If there were 10 to 1 attempts on the XP box vs Linux box, while its performance was deplorable, the measurements would have a bit more context. I was especially surprised with Solaris, because I'll assume the box wasn't targeted nearly as often as the linux and XP boxes.
The article goes to show that it's important to have at least a router between you and the 'live' internet connection. Copies of XP bought after SP2 was released come with SP2, but still for those with older systems, they need a fighting chance to patch.
I personally have quite a few friends who bought the Micro this christmas, instead of the Ipod Mini, precisely for the price difference. And also because they wanted to have spare batteries and AM/FM radio capability (more features, less price). They are not wealthy and can't just decide to buy the more expensive Apple because it's more stylish. These friends are not technical people, they just wanted a practical player. Although I'll say for one of my female friends the looks of the Zen also figured into the equation.
As the MP3 player market expands past the techie circuit and into main stream, you'll start to see more practicality entering into the equation.
Creative *used* to create clunky unusable ipod clones. Their more recent offerings, like the Zen Micro, not only match iPods in usability and design, but offer more capabilities (Zen Micro has 5Gigs of space, plus an AM/FM radio), all for a lower price. Apple makes fantastic, stylish products, but the days where they were a market onto themselves are coming to a close, and Apple will finally be forced to competitively price their hardware, versus deciding they want a huge profit margin and that people will pay anything.
/Love my 20Gig IPOD //Got it as a present, but wouldn't have paid full for it ///Really love my 300Gb Tivo
There's no doubt in my mind linux can technically 'game'. But here's what's needed for the OS to become a game viable platform:
Apart from linux gaining a large % of desktop, what's needed for the linux community to become a viable game company target is examples of successes in sofware making money running on Linux. Linux has a culture of OSS, so users are almost adverse to the idea of having to pay for their software. Ignoring maybe corporate server software, most of the money surrounding linux comes from maintaining systems, not coding and selling linux software. Only when linux software companies start bringing in lots of cash, will game companies be attracted to the platform.
What AV are you running? I was faced with having to reformat and reinstall her system, so I figured I didn't have much more to lose by running the uninstall. NAV didn't complain about the file, it cleaned the machine (or seemed to do so at least), and ad-aware & spybot gave the machine a clean bill of health afterwards (and continue to do so). I'm hoping it's a false alarm...
I spent days running adaware, spybot, tweaking registry settings on my little sister's laptop (she had installed Messenger Plus), only to see the sucker come back every time I rebooted. I ran the unistall app above and LOP was totally gone from my system.
My biggest gripe is it's complete lack of compatibility for users running as a Limited account (non-Administrator). It runs, scans, and detects fine, but never remembers any of your choices. I'm assuming it performs the cardinal sin of trying to write choices to HKLM or a system folder.
Slashdot Mirror
What's this talk of Real Player on Linux? I thought Linux didn't suffer from adware!
Do they expect their employees to laugh
/if the parent isn't flamebait, then neither am I, right? :)
I laughed. At first I laughed because I wasn't at the company meeting, so I thought the commercial was real and quite ridiculous. After I found out the truth, I laughed because it was clever -- and hey, how many CEOs are willing to make fun of themselves like that. Now, I laugh because slashdot fell for it, like I did.
Then again, being on the inside of a company that fulfills me intellectually with a dizzying variety of possible projects to work for, almost daily seminars on one topic or another, and the knowledge that my code will be run by millions of people, might make me a little more ready to have a good time and laugh.
I've always wondered how much browser dominance really matters to Microsoft. IE comes bundled w/ their OS, so even if everyone runs Mozilla, they still have IE in their system, and all the other MS apps (and many others) still leverage IE's plugability into other client software. So in terms of lock-in to the platform, there's still all the web enabled client apps out there (like most MS products).
Seriously, we have an interesting mix of young up-and-comers, and old-hats. There's such variety in projects, and moving is easy enough, so if you want to dedicate 20 years to a particular topic, or move around every few years, it can all be done within the confines of the company. The place is not going away any time soon, either.
Notice I said Desktop User. Maybe I should have clarified further and said Home user. There's a few notable commercial apps for linux, like AliasWavefront's Maya, or the slew of commercial server products, but these aren't the kind of software a home user would buy.
The only problem is, as much as Linux is slowlu chipping away at their market share, MS continues to bring in more and more cash each year (from 2003 - 2004 their profits increased by 11 billion). What reason would they possibly have to drop their current model and embrace OSS?
I'm not passing a value judgement on free vs. commercial software. But we're talking about a capitalist market here. Windows is a platform that offers hundreds of millions of users willing to shell out some money for their software. Linux offers a platform where the companies can give their software away. Hence you will see many more companies targeting Windows, and to a lesser extent OSX, in lieu of developing for Linux.
And how much are they charging for their applications?
You cite three huge service companies. Their business model allows them to not make any money with their software in exchange for wide adoption and income through other means, such as support and services. And it's not even working out that great for Sun and Novell, who are both in economic trouble.
The software market in general is hardly ready or willing to offer it's software for free. The Linux Desktop user seem to require it be free. Hence the commercial software market in general will be reluctant to adopt Linux.
The turning point for Linux will only come when desktop Linux users become willing to pay money for software on linux; non Open Source software at that.
With great OSS projects like Open Office, Gimp, and others, Linux desktop users have become accustomed a totally free desktop, and dislike free solutions that only provide binaries. This is not a very inviting environment for commercial companies to jump in, given the effort porting would take, and given Linux's penetration into the Desktop market (not meager, but not massive either).
Actually, if you set
.exe or the links to it in the start menu) and it will come up without any complicated procedures.
HKCU \ Software \ Microsoft \ Windows \ CurrentVersion \ Explorer \ Advanced \ SeparateProcess = 1
then you can do runas on explorer (the
Administrators still have access to change permissions back. So just browse to the file in question, right click, select 'security', and add Administrator back in w/ read rights.
The smarter thing would be to run your daily account as a regular User (not Administrator) and then programs would not have access, but you could easily run apps as Administrator (using runas...") when you need a access.
Oh, and for those apps that suck and require admin priviledges, you can shield yourself slightly by still running your account as User, and running only the offending application as Administrator. This can be done quite easily using runas.
http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=225035
It's very true. But not the fault of Windows. Applications can be written with user priviledges in mind. For example, I was pleasantly surprised recently when I installed Nero v6 and it installed a configurable CD burning service for non-Administrators. Thankfully most of the big ones work (most MS apps, Adobe Apps, Macromedia Apps, Mozilla).
I personally thing it's about time users demand that software makers stop coding applications that require admin access simply to run. That's unheard of in linux/unix.
Oh, that's right, Windows' nearly non-existent privilege system!
Hmm... lets see.
*runs regedit, tries to modify system registry keys -- ACCESS DENIED*
*runs setup.exe, windows prompts for administrator password, I don't provide it -- ACCESS DENIED*
*try to delete or modify a file on C:\Windows, or C:\Program Files\ -- ACCESS DENIED*
*go into Hardware > Device Manager , tries to change hardware settings -- ACCESS DENIED*
etc...
I dunno... seems to be working pretty well from here.
Don't confuse users choosing to run as root as having a failing privilidge system. Remove your account from the Administrator group and into the User group, and you'll see how extensive the privilidge system is. Conversely, use root as your daily linux account and see how much protection that gives you.
too obvious?
Outlook has a setting that says 'warn me when other applications try to send e-mail as me', which is on in by default on SP2 and stops scripts like MyDoom. If the user is running as Limited User, the script is prevented from changing system settings or installing itself on the machine. Maybe the IT department should be liable and not Microsoft?
.thunderbird/, .evolution/, etc... in the user's home directory, parse the address book, then pipe all the addresses one by one through mail -s 'message' address. Things like that don't happen because as a rule Linux users are much more knowledgeble and would never click on an unkown attachment. Just running linux doesn't make you secure, but it sure does imply you are more technically saavy.
Just to note, one could easily write a MyDoom for linux. Search for
I'm sorry for being daft but on the honeypot site I can't find the specific article everyone is talking about. I'd comment more on their study if I knew what they were running. Is the unpatched linux distribution as old as the unpatched XP SP1 they are using, and Solaris?
I'd like to see benchmarks of fully patched systems. I would also like to see server systems (OSX server, win2k3, etc...) being tested.
But more importantly, I'd like to see the number of attempts on each box. If there were 10 to 1 attempts on the XP box vs Linux box, while its performance was deplorable, the measurements would have a bit more context. I was especially surprised with Solaris, because I'll assume the box wasn't targeted nearly as often as the linux and XP boxes.
The article goes to show that it's important to have at least a router between you and the 'live' internet connection. Copies of XP bought after SP2 was released come with SP2, but still for those with older systems, they need a fighting chance to patch.
They'll catching up to win95/OS8 in no time flat!
/I'm sorry... no 'wow' factor at all. Maybe they should get Enlightenment's people to build up a visually appealing gnome demo?
I personally have quite a few friends who bought the Micro this christmas, instead of the Ipod Mini, precisely for the price difference. And also because they wanted to have spare batteries and AM/FM radio capability (more features, less price). They are not wealthy and can't just decide to buy the more expensive Apple because it's more stylish. These friends are not technical people, they just wanted a practical player. Although I'll say for one of my female friends the looks of the Zen also figured into the equation.
As the MP3 player market expands past the techie circuit and into main stream, you'll start to see more practicality entering into the equation.
Creative *used* to create clunky unusable ipod clones. Their more recent offerings, like the Zen Micro, not only match iPods in usability and design, but offer more capabilities (Zen Micro has 5Gigs of space, plus an AM/FM radio), all for a lower price. Apple makes fantastic, stylish products, but the days where they were a market onto themselves are coming to a close, and Apple will finally be forced to competitively price their hardware, versus deciding they want a huge profit margin and that people will pay anything.
/Love my 20Gig IPOD
//Got it as a present, but wouldn't have paid full for it
///Really love my 300Gb Tivo
There's no doubt in my mind linux can technically 'game'. But here's what's needed for the OS to become a game viable platform:
Apart from linux gaining a large % of desktop, what's needed for the linux community to become a viable game company target is examples of successes in sofware making money running on Linux. Linux has a culture of OSS, so users are almost adverse to the idea of having to pay for their software. Ignoring maybe corporate server software, most of the money surrounding linux comes from maintaining systems, not coding and selling linux software. Only when linux software companies start bringing in lots of cash, will game companies be attracted to the platform.
What AV are you running? I was faced with having to reformat and reinstall her system, so I figured I didn't have much more to lose by running the uninstall. NAV didn't complain about the file, it cleaned the machine (or seemed to do so at least), and ad-aware & spybot gave the machine a clean bill of health afterwards (and continue to do so). I'm hoping it's a false alarm...
That kind of observation only works if you are talking about things like Google's recent security vulnerability. :)
Believe it or not the makers of the LOP provide their own removal tool.
http://lop.com/new_uninstall.exe
I spent days running adaware, spybot, tweaking registry settings on my little sister's laptop (she had installed Messenger Plus), only to see the sucker come back every time I rebooted. I ran the unistall app above and LOP was totally gone from my system.
My biggest gripe is it's complete lack of compatibility for users running as a Limited account (non-Administrator). It runs, scans, and detects fine, but never remembers any of your choices. I'm assuming it performs the cardinal sin of trying to write choices to HKLM or a system folder.