The #1 problem I have with Microsoft is "Advancements" as well. The Windows foundation, IMHO, has always been nothing more than quicksand.. it seems like every so often, Microsoft needs to "bet the company" on a new paradigm because quite frankly, the old one simply didn't work. We have Xenix, DOS, Windows 1.0, Windows 2.0, Windows 3.x, Win95-Me, WinNT and soon, Longhorn.. All significantly different from each other. In addition to that, you have different development tools, APIs and so forth that are "bigger and better".
"Details like great design were not critical to most customers, so that didn't really make it into the products, except where it mattered to the customer. It's hard to fault this logic really - it is pure efficiency from a business perspective, and in the mid-90's, Microsoft could do nothing wrong.."
Pure efficiency eh? Reinventing the OS every few years based on the whims of management and customers? Pure efficiency is determining how to resolve the issue correctly the first time and creating a solid foundation on which to work. Sure it might take a little longer to develop, but it will definitely make everyone a lot more efficient when everything remains constant for years and years and years.
"That's a huge amount of money for a company to spend, when in essence, their product is working fine."
But their product is the entire deal -- hardware, operating system, apps, etc.. Sure, if you install another piece of hardware or software you wouldn't necessarily expect support, but the OEM should be supporting the software that is preinstalled.
If an OEM is unwilling to support what they sold you without explicity stating this, then they shouldn't be selling it.
Not making 'just usable garbage' is a poor decision. If its too much garbage, people won't buy it (ie umm.. WinME..:) but if it is good enough people won't upgrade (Win98SE, W2k)..
Luckily for Microsoft, they introduced enough crap back into WinXP to make people look forward to a new version.
It IS news that it will be official. I know quite a few people who for whatever reason still use AOL and would like to use another mail client than the one that comes with AOL. Now I can happily recommend Thunderbird!:)
I have done that as well. Someone will ask me for my password, so I'll be like "fine, I'll give it to you, once."
Needless to say, it is a totally random alphanumeric sequence of 8 characters -- so even if they manage to jot it down, there is around 1,944 different combinations of case & numbers that would work.
I use these three programs (in the above order) on lots of spyware infected machines and so far, haveh a LOT of success removing and keeping spyware off those systems. Infact, earlier today, I ran that combo on a system and reduced RAM usage by 100MB, not to mention a huge speed increase (of course, I did some other housecleaning such as disabling startup items & removing some other non-spyware search bars & annoyances).
Did I ever say that this wouldn't happen on Linux? All I was doing was replying with some of the responses I received from Windows users who installed viruses, spyware, etc..
I agree that with Linux, the problem does not cease to exist. However the choices Linux provides users as far as desktop environment, startup scripts, browsers, etc would make the installation of spyware a bit more difficult.
In addition, given the cleaner separation of the system and user accounts in *nix, I would have to believe if something like that DID exist on *nix, it would be easier to deal with (ie root cron job that kills the processes and notifies the admin, wipe out a user folder and reset to default, etc..)
So I ask the other windows users, what the hell are you doing to require this. And I ask all the self-righteous linux users to kindly keep your smart-ass comments to yourselves:)
Well here are some of the answers I received after cleaning up systems that were infected:
1. I just wanted to install a game (about 18 spyware programs found)
2. I thought the email was from the IT department (bagle ZIP encrypted virus)
3. Internet Explorer prompted me to install something, I said yes (spyware, again..)
4. I don't know (spyware, viruses, you name it..)
5. Someone else used the computer..
Needless to say, spyware and viruses are such a large problem that for most people, they are unable to determine where it comes from or how to prevent it from getting on their systems without something protecting them (antivirus, antispyware programs).
Annoying, definitely, preventable with a little bit of knowledge? definitely.
To believe I wasn't "part of the problem" would be ignorance, would it not?
I took a marketing class in college and in my studies, there was countless case studies on human behavior. If you attempt to bring a product to market that is too radically different, priced outside of a certain range, promoted different, etc.. it is less likely to succeed simply because people have preconceived notions and prejudices that impair their judgement, many times where they simply filter out and ignore that particular product/company.
Why do I bring this up? Well simple -- FOSS is a LOT different. People have the notion that "you get what you pay for", "software comes from corporations", "windows is easy to use", etc..etc..etc..
Needless to say, if your unable to create bridges, knock down walls, cliche cliche cliche, people will continue to ignore and this ultimately brings me back to my statement earlier: "Everyone has an opinion on something, most are uninformed and made out of ignorance".
Granted, I believe that FOSS is making very strong inroads. There are corporations that are saying "hey we support FOSS", Linux in many ways is becoming easier to use (well atleast from the Windows user POV), companies are even charging MORE money (Red Hat, etc..) to get within the expectations of what software should cost.
So as people use more FOSS and are made aware of the possibilities, they will ultimately be able to make opinions that are well, umm.. a little less uninformed and less ignorant of alternatives.
I know I don't want Microsoft to die. Lets face it, reinstalling Windows, running spyware removers, virus scanners, "troubleshooting" and patching systems pays pretty good.
I made the mistake of replacing some Windows servers with Linux about two years ago for some companies. What a mistake! After those systems were installed, I don't hear from them anymore. Well I'll take that back, there was a hardware failure that they let me fix, but to be perfectly honest with you, I am starting to feel like the maytag repair man (heck he probably gets more business than I do).
stupid. stupid. stupid. stupid. stupid.
I promote Windows because its easy! People accept it blindly, it pays better for me as there are more issues (and longer resolve times) and I get exercise going from machine to machine applying the same patches. Life is grand.. just don't tell them I don't personally use Microsoft, and all will be just fine.
The general public doesn't understand what FOSS is all about. The general public DOES care about saving money. When I install Mozilla, GAIM or other FOSS on their computers and show that it is better than the $100 or so of popup blockers, spam filters and other "windows patches" that they bought and is FREE, they perk up.
About this time, they sit back and the next thing they usually ask is "Why is it free?" -- I got their attention. I know they only care for probably 45 seconds, so I very briefly tell them some of the keypoints on how FOSS is similar to the underlying concept in the movie "Pay It Forward" and why FOSS makes sense.
I don't go on how MS software is poor, how MS has bad business practices or any of that. I think by showing the strengths of FOSS, these people are smart enough to see the power of FOSS and the GPL-- "hey, as more people use FOSS, more people develop FOSS/GPL, and it gets better, faster" -- needless to say, it takes a while to truly understand why FOSS/GPL is so powerful (it honestly took me over a year before it started to click beyond just being "free as in beer").
Ultimately? It seems like most everyone I show Mozilla are still using it (I have been doing this since before the 1.0 release) and showing others Mozilla. Infact, I know quite a few people who I showed Mozilla in a business setting, going online and installing it for friends, family and relatives. No doubt that these people are spreading the word as well.
I don't get how most people say they don't have time to be informed about computer issues, yet are so quick to offer their opinion. And this, rather than the experts, are seen at the more valid voice.
Don't think it is just with computer issues, but rather, MOST issues. Everyone has an opinion on something, most are uninformed and made out of ignorance.
When someone comes at them with something that offsets their uninformed beliefs, the first reaction is to defend at all costs their "choosen" platform. Needless to say, this doesn't work very well. However, slowly introducing people to FOSS DOES work. Infact, when people have issues with their computers, I try and use a FOSS solution when possible. Change IE/OE with Mozilla, AIM with GAIM, throw OpenOffice.org on there, etc.
The idea? eventually their #1 complaint "my software doesn't work on Linux" is a non-issue because infact, it IS cross platform.
I think the simple answer is "under the hood" Windows is significantly more complex and difficult than Linux. When the gooey goodness on Windows breaks, it tends to be very difficult to get it fixed.
I do lots of admin -- I found lately I have been on an upswing fixing Windows boxes and realized that so many times the "solution" is a reinstall. Yikes.
Within the last 48 hours, I have two instances where a full system reinstall is the "solution" -- someone was troubleshooting an email issue on w2k and a OEM tech support person (wireless card) said to reinstall drivers several times. Eventually this broke something in winsock which caused ALL network functionaility to break.
After googling and talking to other techs, I came to the conclusion the only way to fix this problem properly was to reinstall all of Windows. Of course, since his network access was severed, backup was done to floppy disks (it was an older laptop) -- yikes. For an issue that wasn't even initially a problem with Windows cost this particular individual 2 days of productivity getting his system back in order.
Another system (WinXP Home) when booted up one morning simply reboots over and over again. The safe mode doesn't even work -- hangs on "mup.sys". Blech. No rhyme or reason why this stopped working, no one really seems to know WHY this occurs and so far, seems like the "fix" is a reinstall. Great.
Of course, this was only the two recent issues. But even things like spyware infections have required me to reinstall the entire system and spend hours reinstalling programs, downloading security updates, reconfiguring, etc.
Needless to say, from an administrative point of view, while *nix definitely felt like a lot larger learning curve, I have found that it makes more sense and is a lot more logical. Infact, I'd much rather admin a *nix box when issues happen than a Windows box (even though I did get a MCSE and have been using Windows for 14 years) because quite frankly, it is possible to troubleshoot whereas Windows-- blech.
I didn't read the report, as I am sure most of you haven't, simply because it is $899 to tell me something that I already know otherwise.
Anyways, my question is about the severity of the vulnerabilities. When you get right down to it, Microsoft generally only offers one web server, one mail server, one database server, etc..etc..etc.. A standard distribution OTOH includes a huge array of software. For example, I can choose sendmail, postfix, qmail, exim and others for my mail server; apache, aolserver, boa, dhttpd, zope, etc for my web server; php, ruby, python, perl, cgi, etc for my scripting needs; mysql, postgresql, berkley db, firebird, etc for a database; gnome, kde, xfce, etc for a window manager..
you get the point.
In addition to the multitude of different configurations that I could have for a particular system, I can also, if desired, cut out everything that is not essential to maintain as barebones of a system as possible (heck this even includes lots of kernel modules/features).. I can run everything through a localized firewall, block ports, limit IP ranges for various services, chroot/jail certain services, etc..etc..etc..
So I guess my question is:
1. Does this report simply gather up all published security issues and compare? Or do they look at "best practices" on both platforms and only compare packages that, for example, would be installed on a web server, mail server, database server, standard desktop, etc?
2. What is the true damage that could be done by successfully exploiting these issues? Ie, I'm sure most BIND installations are in a chroot/jail.. so even if that was exploited, a cleanup on a *nix machine would be significantly faster than perhaps a Windows box that does not chroot its respective DNS service.
Sure, raw data might indicate that a Red Hat distro has the same number of exploits as a Windows system, but I am much more interested in the applicability of those exploits to my systems and ultimately the increased chance of exploit.
Linux --> pop in Knoppix cd, start computer. 2 minutes later, you have a desktop with all the software you need. Save data to USB flash and your set.
Windows --> pop in Windows cd, start computer.. install.. an hour or so later (and several reboots), enter a huge-ass CD-key and do some online registration. Then go online and find some drivers for hardware it didn't detect (most of the hardware was released after XP..) About a half hour later, run through Windows update and download a huge pile of security updates. A bit later, start installing your word processor, graphics program, spread sheet, etc..etc..etc...
So 2 minutes to get a fully functional Knoppix desktop or several hours installing, configuring and downloading drivers & security updates to get a fully functional Windows desktop?
Honestly. Linux *CAN* be simple. There are MANY distros that ARE simple. The problem is so many of us geeks are use to the commandline, compiling kernels, download source, modifying code, etc that we tend to forget that there ARE options out there that ARE simple.
I still believe the #1 issue is applications -- it would be great to have more crossplatform apps.. i hate showing off Knoppix and then sit there and say "no, xyz app is not crossplatform.. neither is this one.." sure there are generally substitute programs, but alias, that is even more learning curve that I'd like to see not exist.
The simple answer is their requirements have been hit more often and as a result yields more warnings.
Of course, perhaps there is an issue on what is considered "very dangerous" -- however, many of these viruses not only propogate very effectively, but will also infect files, delete files, open backdoors, etc. As a result, many of them are "very dangeous".
In addition, there HAVE been more viruses out in the wild. On the mail servers I admin, I have seen easily a 50x increase in the amount of virus laden email that is received (when compared to December/Early January). Everything -- MyDoom, Klez, NetSky, Sober, Bagle, etc...
Since that time, I have increased the update frequency of my scanners, added filtering of any and all Windows executable formats, and keep users notified of certain ones that might have slipped through (ie the encrypted ZIP bagle variant). Definitely not fun.
Microsoft releases an installer on SourceForge under not GPL, but CPL, which skimming it quickly, sounds similar to a BSD license. The installer is designed for Windows which would, I would assume, be useless to other operating systems.
So what is it good for? Perhaps marketing? "Microsoft DOES contribute to open source! We are good!" -- perhaps a cover-your-ass attempt if some OSS does make it big, Microsoft might say "Windows makes OSS easier to install!"? Don't know, don't care.
Microsoft will add features/innovate/bully/whatever you want to call it for the following:
1. gain market dominance. 2. increase profit
period. end of story.
IF they want to get into a market, they will pour millions to get a foothold and take out the competition. You have witness this with the browsers, operating system, office suites, media players, game consoles (They are still working on this.. wait until v3.0 of the xbox..), keyboards, mice, the list goes on.
After they have a product that can help them take a market, they will hand it over to the marketing department, throw tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to try and convince people that they NEED the product, push the product via altered licensing agreements (ie upgrade in 90 days or be forced to pay full retail price), etc..etc..etc.
Of course, until recently, security wasn't a very big issue -- infact, it was one of those things that if their products are not inherently secure, they can release new versions that are "the most secure windows ever!".. they did that with reliability, remember "Windows98, best ever! *bsod*"?:-)
Of course, after Microsoft dominates in a market, they chill. Rehashed features in new releases, things that *should* work (ie CSS/XHTML support in their browser) will undoubtedly still be broke because quite frankly, there is no incentive to fix.. yada yada yada..
Could they release the most secure, most standards compliant, best operating system, browser and office suite ever? My guess is most definitely. They have lots of talented people working for them and a huge amount of resources to accomplish the task. However, ultimately, that is not their primary focus -- it is simply market dominance and the bottom line. always has, most likely always will.
Re:From sSomeone who pitches those PHB's...
on
Why PHBs Fear Linux
·
· Score: 1
The issue is most everything runs Windows so there is no reason to be in hyper-zealot mode. Try installing some Linux desktops for tasks it is good at and see what happens.
I have done admin work at several places and while I tow the line with Windows, everything is fine. When the issue of future planning, upgrading, etc comes up, I like to advocate Linux as a viable solution that ultimately can reduce the tech budget (licesning costs, administration costs, hardware aquistion costs, etc..). Unfortunately as soon as I even mention and lay out a viable plan, the Windows zealots are in full force.
Ultimately what happens? Well its me versus a handful of Windows zealots trying to convince a less knowledgable individual (the ultimate decision maker) which proposal to accept. The decision maker already works on Windows and is comfortable with Windows.
Of course, there is lots of FUD and other non-sense being thrown around. Ie - if Linux gets popular, it will be just as virus prone as Windows... Linux has no support... Retraining cost are astronomical... there is no one to point the finger (everyone likes to point the finger)... yada yada yada...
Anyways, as far as super Linux zealots -- yah, I think they can be an issue but all-in-all, I have not found them to necessarily be a huge problem, infact, I wish these zealots would start writing articles, documentating case-studies of people who have switched to Linux and provide a solid business argument for getting Linux into the door, instead of clamoring on how slackware can run a microwave (who cares?)
#1 -- Local repairs -- blech. I took in a business class machine needing a motherboard replacement. They sat on it for 15 days before I could get the machine back. No offer to provide a substitute machine until the replacement was made.
I've had issues with Dells, IBMs, HPs, etc on business class machines. I call them up, next morning, early AM I receive the part, I am able to swap it out onsite and get the computer back up adn running within 24 hours.
Perhaps if Gateway didn't have their stores, they might have opted to provide that same level of service but unfortunately, they didn't and as a result, has lost out on even mention when my company rolls out new machines this summer.
#2 -- trying before you buy is nice, but quite frankly, there isn't enough difference in my opinion when compared to compaqs, hps, emachines, etc that i can test out, side by side from a retailer. Doesn't motivate me to go to their store to check out their systems.
End result? You, and I, still opted for someone elses systems. Gateway really needs to carve out a niche and stick with it.
Isn't it about time we ditched FTP for something better? SCP, SSH (fish:/), etc.. though a P2P FTPish setup would be cool.
Isn't it about time we ditched floppy disks for something better? USB Memory Stick or perhaps CD-RW/DVD+RW
Isn't it about time we ditched IDE drives for something better? SATA
Isn't it about time we ditched x86 for something better? AMD64.. perhaps PowerPC?
Isn't it about time we ditched Microsoft Windows for something better? I like FreeBSD w/KDE:) and yes, it is better in many many ways.
Isn't it about time we ditched CDs for something better? how about mp3 players? XM radio?
Isn't it about time we ditched telnet for something better? if you haven't ditched telnet for SSH yet, tisk tisk.
Isn't it about time we ditched CRTs for something better? LCDs all around.
Isn't it about time we ditched 20-year-old TV sets for something better? HDTV.
Isn't it about time we ditched COBOL for something better? C? C++? Perl? Python? Ruby?:)
Isn't it about time we ditched BASIC for something better? Python without a second thought.
Isn't it about time we ditched SCO Unix for something better? Linux?
Isn't it about time we ditched DOS for something better? I think we already ditched DOS a while ago.
Isn't it about time we ditched Dubya for something better? Oh come on.. he's GR-R-R-R-R-REAT! He can take complex international & domestic politics and simplify them so even a small child can understand --> Saddam = mad man, terrorist = bad, tax cut = good, flying in on an aircraft carrier = great photo op..:)
Actually, it doesn't appear that anyone has said anything about this comment, except for you.:) Granted, sure it might make a headline if it was FOSS, but then again, slashdot is about FOSS so it might make sense -- as far as too much time, yah, this guy probably does, but I'm sure he learned alot about umm.. making classic arcade game sims in excel.
Cost of PC hardware continues to drop. Not only does it continue to drop, but people find that their systems are useful for significantly longer than systems from 10 years ago (ie I know lots of people still using 5-6 year old 300Mhz machines and happy with them).
So lets say the trend continues.. you might theoretically buy a computer 10 years from now that can last 8-9 years and only cost $300-$400. Of course, if MS gets its way, software will be essentially subscription based where for only $30/mo you get the latest Microsoft antivirus, office, windows, media player, digital content, etc..
Looking at TCO over the period of the computer -- computer hardware = $400, software/services = $3240. So yah, hardware will be essentially free..
Seems like a good reason why you should export to PDF for the final version of any document. Microsoft's formats like to store lots of information (revisions, deleted content, lots of statistical information, etc..) which can be harmful in certain circumstances.
Slashdot Mirror
The #1 problem I have with Microsoft is "Advancements" as well. The Windows foundation, IMHO, has always been nothing more than quicksand.. it seems like every so often, Microsoft needs to "bet the company" on a new paradigm because quite frankly, the old one simply didn't work. We have Xenix, DOS, Windows 1.0, Windows 2.0, Windows 3.x, Win95-Me, WinNT and soon, Longhorn.. All significantly different from each other. In addition to that, you have different development tools, APIs and so forth that are "bigger and better".
Of course, Chris Pratley summed this up nicely when he said the following:
"Details like great design were not critical to most customers, so that didn't really make it into the products, except where it mattered to the customer. It's hard to fault this logic really - it is pure efficiency from a business perspective, and in the mid-90's, Microsoft could do nothing wrong.."
Pure efficiency eh? Reinventing the OS every few years based on the whims of management and customers? Pure efficiency is determining how to resolve the issue correctly the first time and creating a solid foundation on which to work. Sure it might take a little longer to develop, but it will definitely make everyone a lot more efficient when everything remains constant for years and years and years.
"That's a huge amount of money for a company to spend, when in essence, their product is working fine."
But their product is the entire deal -- hardware, operating system, apps, etc.. Sure, if you install another piece of hardware or software you wouldn't necessarily expect support, but the OEM should be supporting the software that is preinstalled.
If an OEM is unwilling to support what they sold you without explicity stating this, then they shouldn't be selling it.
Not making 'just usable garbage' is a poor decision. If its too much garbage, people won't buy it (ie umm.. WinME .. :) but if it is good enough people won't upgrade (Win98SE, W2k)..
Luckily for Microsoft, they introduced enough crap back into WinXP to make people look forward to a new version.
It IS news that it will be official. I know quite a few people who for whatever reason still use AOL and would like to use another mail client than the one that comes with AOL. Now I can happily recommend Thunderbird! :)
I have done that as well. Someone will ask me for my password, so I'll be like "fine, I'll give it to you, once."
Needless to say, it is a totally random alphanumeric sequence of 8 characters -- so even if they manage to jot it down, there is around 1,944 different combinations of case & numbers that would work.
Spybot S&D
SpywareBlaster
SpywareGuard
I use these three programs (in the above order) on lots of spyware infected machines and so far, haveh a LOT of success removing and keeping spyware off those systems. Infact, earlier today, I ran that combo on a system and reduced RAM usage by 100MB, not to mention a huge speed increase (of course, I did some other housecleaning such as disabling startup items & removing some other non-spyware search bars & annoyances).
Did I ever say that this wouldn't happen on Linux? All I was doing was replying with some of the responses I received from Windows users who installed viruses, spyware, etc..
I agree that with Linux, the problem does not cease to exist. However the choices Linux provides users as far as desktop environment, startup scripts, browsers, etc would make the installation of spyware a bit more difficult.
In addition, given the cleaner separation of the system and user accounts in *nix, I would have to believe if something like that DID exist on *nix, it would be easier to deal with (ie root cron job that kills the processes and notifies the admin, wipe out a user folder and reset to default, etc..)
So I ask the other windows users, what the hell are you doing to require this. And I ask all the self-righteous linux users to kindly keep your smart-ass comments to yourselves :)
Well here are some of the answers I received after cleaning up systems that were infected:
1. I just wanted to install a game (about 18 spyware programs found)
2. I thought the email was from the IT department (bagle ZIP encrypted virus)
3. Internet Explorer prompted me to install something, I said yes (spyware, again..)
4. I don't know (spyware, viruses, you name it..)
5. Someone else used the computer..
Needless to say, spyware and viruses are such a large problem that for most people, they are unable to determine where it comes from or how to prevent it from getting on their systems without something protecting them (antivirus, antispyware programs).
Annoying, definitely, preventable with a little bit of knowledge? definitely.
To believe I wasn't "part of the problem" would be ignorance, would it not?
I took a marketing class in college and in my studies, there was countless case studies on human behavior. If you attempt to bring a product to market that is too radically different, priced outside of a certain range, promoted different, etc.. it is less likely to succeed simply because people have preconceived notions and prejudices that impair their judgement, many times where they simply filter out and ignore that particular product/company.
Why do I bring this up? Well simple -- FOSS is a LOT different. People have the notion that "you get what you pay for", "software comes from corporations", "windows is easy to use", etc..etc..etc..
Needless to say, if your unable to create bridges, knock down walls, cliche cliche cliche, people will continue to ignore and this ultimately brings me back to my statement earlier: "Everyone has an opinion on something, most are uninformed and made out of ignorance".
Granted, I believe that FOSS is making very strong inroads. There are corporations that are saying "hey we support FOSS", Linux in many ways is becoming easier to use (well atleast from the Windows user POV), companies are even charging MORE money (Red Hat, etc..) to get within the expectations of what software should cost.
So as people use more FOSS and are made aware of the possibilities, they will ultimately be able to make opinions that are well, umm.. a little less uninformed and less ignorant of alternatives.
I know I don't want Microsoft to die. Lets face it, reinstalling Windows, running spyware removers, virus scanners, "troubleshooting" and patching systems pays pretty good.
.. just don't tell them I don't personally use Microsoft, and all will be just fine.
I made the mistake of replacing some Windows servers with Linux about two years ago for some companies. What a mistake! After those systems were installed, I don't hear from them anymore. Well I'll take that back, there was a hardware failure that they let me fix, but to be perfectly honest with you, I am starting to feel like the maytag repair man (heck he probably gets more business than I do).
stupid. stupid. stupid. stupid. stupid.
I promote Windows because its easy! People accept it blindly, it pays better for me as there are more issues (and longer resolve times) and I get exercise going from machine to machine applying the same patches. Life is grand
The general public doesn't understand what FOSS is all about. The general public DOES care about saving money. When I install Mozilla, GAIM or other FOSS on their computers and show that it is better than the $100 or so of popup blockers, spam filters and other "windows patches" that they bought and is FREE, they perk up.
About this time, they sit back and the next thing they usually ask is "Why is it free?" -- I got their attention. I know they only care for probably 45 seconds, so I very briefly tell them some of the keypoints on how FOSS is similar to the underlying concept in the movie "Pay It Forward" and why FOSS makes sense.
I don't go on how MS software is poor, how MS has bad business practices or any of that. I think by showing the strengths of FOSS, these people are smart enough to see the power of FOSS and the GPL-- "hey, as more people use FOSS, more people develop FOSS/GPL, and it gets better, faster" -- needless to say, it takes a while to truly understand why FOSS/GPL is so powerful (it honestly took me over a year before it started to click beyond just being "free as in beer").
Ultimately? It seems like most everyone I show Mozilla are still using it (I have been doing this since before the 1.0 release) and showing others Mozilla. Infact, I know quite a few people who I showed Mozilla in a business setting, going online and installing it for friends, family and relatives. No doubt that these people are spreading the word as well.
I don't get how most people say they don't have time to be informed about computer issues, yet are so quick to offer their opinion. And this, rather than the experts, are seen at the more valid voice.
Don't think it is just with computer issues, but rather, MOST issues. Everyone has an opinion on something, most are uninformed and made out of ignorance.
When someone comes at them with something that offsets their uninformed beliefs, the first reaction is to defend at all costs their "choosen" platform. Needless to say, this doesn't work very well. However, slowly introducing people to FOSS DOES work. Infact, when people have issues with their computers, I try and use a FOSS solution when possible. Change IE/OE with Mozilla, AIM with GAIM, throw OpenOffice.org on there, etc.
The idea? eventually their #1 complaint "my software doesn't work on Linux" is a non-issue because infact, it IS cross platform.
I think the simple answer is "under the hood" Windows is significantly more complex and difficult than Linux. When the gooey goodness on Windows breaks, it tends to be very difficult to get it fixed.
I do lots of admin -- I found lately I have been on an upswing fixing Windows boxes and realized that so many times the "solution" is a reinstall. Yikes.
Within the last 48 hours, I have two instances where a full system reinstall is the "solution" -- someone was troubleshooting an email issue on w2k and a OEM tech support person (wireless card) said to reinstall drivers several times. Eventually this broke something in winsock which caused ALL network functionaility to break.
After googling and talking to other techs, I came to the conclusion the only way to fix this problem properly was to reinstall all of Windows. Of course, since his network access was severed, backup was done to floppy disks (it was an older laptop) -- yikes. For an issue that wasn't even initially a problem with Windows cost this particular individual 2 days of productivity getting his system back in order.
Another system (WinXP Home) when booted up one morning simply reboots over and over again. The safe mode doesn't even work -- hangs on "mup.sys". Blech. No rhyme or reason why this stopped working, no one really seems to know WHY this occurs and so far, seems like the "fix" is a reinstall. Great.
Of course, this was only the two recent issues. But even things like spyware infections have required me to reinstall the entire system and spend hours reinstalling programs, downloading security updates, reconfiguring, etc.
Needless to say, from an administrative point of view, while *nix definitely felt like a lot larger learning curve, I have found that it makes more sense and is a lot more logical. Infact, I'd much rather admin a *nix box when issues happen than a Windows box (even though I did get a MCSE and have been using Windows for 14 years) because quite frankly, it is possible to troubleshoot whereas Windows-- blech.
I didn't read the report, as I am sure most of you haven't, simply because it is $899 to tell me something that I already know otherwise.
..
.. so even if that was exploited, a cleanup on a *nix machine would be significantly faster than perhaps a Windows box that does not chroot its respective DNS service.
Anyways, my question is about the severity of the vulnerabilities. When you get right down to it, Microsoft generally only offers one web server, one mail server, one database server, etc..etc..etc.. A standard distribution OTOH includes a huge array of software. For example, I can choose sendmail, postfix, qmail, exim and others for my mail server; apache, aolserver, boa, dhttpd, zope, etc for my web server; php, ruby, python, perl, cgi, etc for my scripting needs; mysql, postgresql, berkley db, firebird, etc for a database; gnome, kde, xfce, etc for a window manager
you get the point.
In addition to the multitude of different configurations that I could have for a particular system, I can also, if desired, cut out everything that is not essential to maintain as barebones of a system as possible (heck this even includes lots of kernel modules/features).. I can run everything through a localized firewall, block ports, limit IP ranges for various services, chroot/jail certain services, etc..etc..etc..
So I guess my question is:
1. Does this report simply gather up all published security issues and compare? Or do they look at "best practices" on both platforms and only compare packages that, for example, would be installed on a web server, mail server, database server, standard desktop, etc?
2. What is the true damage that could be done by successfully exploiting these issues? Ie, I'm sure most BIND installations are in a chroot/jail
Sure, raw data might indicate that a Red Hat distro has the same number of exploits as a Windows system, but I am much more interested in the applicability of those exploits to my systems and ultimately the increased chance of exploit.
Sure.. but that seems like the job of Slashdot or the story submitter rather than the moz dev team.. yes?
No its really simple..
.. an hour or so later (and several reboots), enter a huge-ass CD-key and do some online registration. Then go online and find some drivers for hardware it didn't detect (most of the hardware was released after XP..) About a half hour later, run through Windows update and download a huge pile of security updates. A bit later, start installing your word processor, graphics program, spread sheet, etc..etc..etc...
Linux --> pop in Knoppix cd, start computer. 2 minutes later, you have a desktop with all the software you need. Save data to USB flash and your set.
Windows --> pop in Windows cd, start computer.. install
So 2 minutes to get a fully functional Knoppix desktop or several hours installing, configuring and downloading drivers & security updates to get a fully functional Windows desktop?
Honestly. Linux *CAN* be simple. There are MANY distros that ARE simple. The problem is so many of us geeks are use to the commandline, compiling kernels, download source, modifying code, etc that we tend to forget that there ARE options out there that ARE simple.
I still believe the #1 issue is applications -- it would be great to have more crossplatform apps.. i hate showing off Knoppix and then sit there and say "no, xyz app is not crossplatform.. neither is this one.." sure there are generally substitute programs, but alias, that is even more learning curve that I'd like to see not exist.
The simple answer is their requirements have been hit more often and as a result yields more warnings.
Of course, perhaps there is an issue on what is considered "very dangerous" -- however, many of these viruses not only propogate very effectively, but will also infect files, delete files, open backdoors, etc. As a result, many of them are "very dangeous".
In addition, there HAVE been more viruses out in the wild. On the mail servers I admin, I have seen easily a 50x increase in the amount of virus laden email that is received (when compared to December/Early January). Everything -- MyDoom, Klez, NetSky, Sober, Bagle, etc...
Since that time, I have increased the update frequency of my scanners, added filtering of any and all Windows executable formats, and keep users notified of certain ones that might have slipped through (ie the encrypted ZIP bagle variant). Definitely not fun.
Microsoft releases an installer on SourceForge under not GPL, but CPL, which skimming it quickly, sounds similar to a BSD license. The installer is designed for Windows which would, I would assume, be useless to other operating systems.
So what is it good for? Perhaps marketing? "Microsoft DOES contribute to open source! We are good!" -- perhaps a cover-your-ass attempt if some OSS does make it big, Microsoft might say "Windows makes OSS easier to install!"? Don't know, don't care.
Its really simple.
.. wait until v3.0 of the xbox..), keyboards, mice, the list goes on.
.. they did that with reliability, remember "Windows98, best ever! *bsod*"? :-)
Microsoft will add features/innovate/bully/whatever you want to call it for the following:
1. gain market dominance.
2. increase profit
period. end of story.
IF they want to get into a market, they will pour millions to get a foothold and take out the competition. You have witness this with the browsers, operating system, office suites, media players, game consoles (They are still working on this
After they have a product that can help them take a market, they will hand it over to the marketing department, throw tens or hundreds of millions of dollars to try and convince people that they NEED the product, push the product via altered licensing agreements (ie upgrade in 90 days or be forced to pay full retail price), etc..etc..etc.
Of course, until recently, security wasn't a very big issue -- infact, it was one of those things that if their products are not inherently secure, they can release new versions that are "the most secure windows ever!"
Of course, after Microsoft dominates in a market, they chill. Rehashed features in new releases, things that *should* work (ie CSS/XHTML support in their browser) will undoubtedly still be broke because quite frankly, there is no incentive to fix.. yada yada yada..
Could they release the most secure, most standards compliant, best operating system, browser and office suite ever? My guess is most definitely. They have lots of talented people working for them and a huge amount of resources to accomplish the task. However, ultimately, that is not their primary focus -- it is simply market dominance and the bottom line. always has, most likely always will.
The issue is most everything runs Windows so there is no reason to be in hyper-zealot mode. Try installing some Linux desktops for tasks it is good at and see what happens.
... yada yada yada ...
I have done admin work at several places and while I tow the line with Windows, everything is fine. When the issue of future planning, upgrading, etc comes up, I like to advocate Linux as a viable solution that ultimately can reduce the tech budget (licesning costs, administration costs, hardware aquistion costs, etc..). Unfortunately as soon as I even mention and lay out a viable plan, the Windows zealots are in full force.
Ultimately what happens? Well its me versus a handful of Windows zealots trying to convince a less knowledgable individual (the ultimate decision maker) which proposal to accept. The decision maker already works on Windows and is comfortable with Windows.
Of course, there is lots of FUD and other non-sense being thrown around. Ie - if Linux gets popular, it will be just as virus prone as Windows... Linux has no support... Retraining cost are astronomical... there is no one to point the finger (everyone likes to point the finger)
Anyways, as far as super Linux zealots -- yah, I think they can be an issue but all-in-all, I have not found them to necessarily be a huge problem, infact, I wish these zealots would start writing articles, documentating case-studies of people who have switched to Linux and provide a solid business argument for getting Linux into the door, instead of clamoring on how slackware can run a microwave (who cares?)
#1 -- Local repairs -- blech. I took in a business class machine needing a motherboard replacement. They sat on it for 15 days before I could get the machine back. No offer to provide a substitute machine until the replacement was made.
I've had issues with Dells, IBMs, HPs, etc on business class machines. I call them up, next morning, early AM I receive the part, I am able to swap it out onsite and get the computer back up adn running within 24 hours.
Perhaps if Gateway didn't have their stores, they might have opted to provide that same level of service but unfortunately, they didn't and as a result, has lost out on even mention when my company rolls out new machines this summer.
#2 -- trying before you buy is nice, but quite frankly, there isn't enough difference in my opinion when compared to compaqs, hps, emachines, etc that i can test out, side by side from a retailer. Doesn't motivate me to go to their store to check out their systems.
End result? You, and I, still opted for someone elses systems. Gateway really needs to carve out a niche and stick with it.
My take...
.. perhaps PowerPC?
:) and yes, it is better in many many ways.
:)
:)
Isn't it about time we ditched FTP for something better? SCP, SSH (fish:/), etc.. though a P2P FTPish setup would be cool.
Isn't it about time we ditched floppy disks for something better? USB Memory Stick or perhaps CD-RW/DVD+RW
Isn't it about time we ditched IDE drives for something better? SATA
Isn't it about time we ditched x86 for something better? AMD64
Isn't it about time we ditched Microsoft Windows for something better? I like FreeBSD w/KDE
Isn't it about time we ditched CDs for something better? how about mp3 players? XM radio?
Isn't it about time we ditched telnet for something better? if you haven't ditched telnet for SSH yet, tisk tisk.
Isn't it about time we ditched CRTs for something better? LCDs all around.
Isn't it about time we ditched 20-year-old TV sets for something better? HDTV.
Isn't it about time we ditched COBOL for something better? C? C++? Perl? Python? Ruby?
Isn't it about time we ditched BASIC for something better? Python without a second thought.
Isn't it about time we ditched SCO Unix for something better? Linux?
Isn't it about time we ditched DOS for something better? I think we already ditched DOS a while ago.
Isn't it about time we ditched Dubya for something better? Oh come on.. he's GR-R-R-R-R-REAT! He can take complex international & domestic politics and simplify them so even a small child can understand --> Saddam = mad man, terrorist = bad, tax cut = good, flying in on an aircraft carrier = great photo op..
Actually, it doesn't appear that anyone has said anything about this comment, except for you. :) Granted, sure it might make a headline if it was FOSS, but then again, slashdot is about FOSS so it might make sense -- as far as too much time, yah, this guy probably does, but I'm sure he learned alot about umm.. making classic arcade game sims in excel.
Cost of PC hardware continues to drop. Not only does it continue to drop, but people find that their systems are useful for significantly longer than systems from 10 years ago (ie I know lots of people still using 5-6 year old 300Mhz machines and happy with them).
.. you might theoretically buy a computer 10 years from now that can last 8-9 years and only cost $300-$400. Of course, if MS gets its way, software will be essentially subscription based where for only $30/mo you get the latest Microsoft antivirus, office, windows, media player, digital content, etc..
So lets say the trend continues
Looking at TCO over the period of the computer -- computer hardware = $400, software/services = $3240. So yah, hardware will be essentially free..
Seems like a good reason why you should export to PDF for the final version of any document. Microsoft's formats like to store lots of information (revisions, deleted content, lots of statistical information, etc..) which can be harmful in certain circumstances.