OK. This just has to be said as an annoyance to the capitalists on Slashdot:
Let the market decide! Who cares if it's inferior? As long as Joe Blow and his wife are buying and keeping the economy lubed, it doesn't really matter now does it? I mean, the very idea that you wouldn't want one burned out pixel. It doesn't affect me and it creates wealth. The guy who owns the company that made the monitor is making 50 times more than you and spreading it around by paying the employees of his company. Those employees are eventually going to go an buy a good or service from the company you work at. Keep that in mind... about 2 cents of every ten dollars comes from that big guy's pocket. So let the market decide and screw one little complaint about burnt out pixels!
The problem with forums is that you usually wind up preaching to the converted. Witness Slashdot for instance. We have several groups of converted and they all preach to each other and war with their opposition. But... nothing is ever accomplished:
-Linux vs. Windows -MP3 vs. OGG -Corporations are good vs. Corporations are evil -Capitalism vs. Any other viable option -Conservative vs. Liberal -GNOME vs. KDE
etc...
Forums are, for the most part, a waste of time. The only real way to get your message heard (especially if it is an unpopular one) is with acts that really inconvenience others. As you said, it's a lot like spam. Those folks, as much as they should be flayed alive, are smart enough to know that their method works. Even though it inconveniences others, their message gets heard.
Sometimes the only way to get a message across is to jump up and down and yell "fire" in a crowded theater while holding up a sign saying "I oppose the War in Iraq".
Go here to read a bit about the Palestinians
on
Updates on War in Iraq
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
I found this when I was looking for more information about the Palestinian people. This puts a face to some of the people that we are killing right now. Read it. Learn a little bit about them. Then tell me it's OK to bomb the hell out of that country.
Re:Sad to see so many anti-american people here
on
Updates on War in Iraq
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It IS possible to be against the war and support the troops you trog. To those troops, I say "Godspeed!" But I still think this action is wrong. It is just a sign of the times though. Many people in the United States are extremely arrogant. I think a lot of it has to do with the tech boom in the 90s. Just because of that, they feel like the US is a great place. It USED to be pretty nice, but it gets worse every days. Too many citizens of the United States are arrogant, self-centered, greedy and xenophobic. I think a lot of people here could use a good bitchslapping. Maybe then the message will sink through. The US is not, doesn't deserve to be and never will be the empire that rules the world. Some of my personal pet peeves with the US:
-SUV Drivers who use their vehicles to carry two grocery bags a mile and a half down the road. (I drive a used Nissan Sentra that gets decent gas mileage.) -Lunatic gun owners who *think* they know what a militia means in today's society. Although their argument about needing to overthrow an unjust government is starting to have some validity these days. -Corporate types who seem to think that profit at any cost is a worthwhile thing. Always arguing that when they make money, their underlings make money. Tell that to the single mother working at McDonalds for peanuts and living in a shithole hovel. We REALLY need to re-evaluate the damage that was done to the welfare system by the conservatives. -The general asshole that seems to be more prevalent in our society. You know the type. The guy with an IQ of 20 going around saying "I RULE!!" when he displays some violent act of agression. Or the woman who thinks she "rules" when she puts other women down.
In general the United States has become a VERY ugly place.
Anyway. I wouldn't say that I am your personal troll. I think it's the other way around considering how many arrogant and ridiculous posts you've been making as AC to my other account. You get what you asked for and you are pretty predictable to boot. So much fun to manipulate you.
So... you, as an avowed conservative, are saying that Clinton was doing the right thing in 1998?
Well then, by transitive property, that means all the Repugs who were making fun of Clinton and bashing those actions back then (Think Rush Limbaugh for one) were on the wrong side of the coin. So does that make you and the rest of your conservative brothers two-faced? I think so!!!
You'll happily bash and ridicule a liberal, but your conservative god GWB can't be touched. Fucking hypocrites and liars... every one of you.
You probably prefer Windows over Linux as well. My god you ARE an asshole aren't you?
Just call him what he is: A dyslexic alcoholic Texan with a low IQ.
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Truer words have never been spoken. If only there were a way (that I could afford) to leave the former United States of America...
Re:You are all seriously uninformed!
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
Applause! This is THE ONLY reasonable post I've seen amongst these comments. The major point is that EVERYONE has an agenda and they are all trying to push it. Bush does, Saddam does, Chirac does, etc... This is something that gets lost in all the polarization that takes place in This vs. That arguments. The war and the motives behind it on all sides are no exception. Someone PLEASE mod the parent up!!!!
A little bit of a rant...
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
You can choose to ignore this if you want, but I need to say it: What really repulses me about the way we treat war after "Desert Storm" is that they are almost trying to make it into a Reality TV experience now. It's a fucking travesty. News and information about it is one thing, but is a play by play really necessary? I am certain that we now have armchair generals saying how they would have done things differently. The only things missing are half-time and the expensive ads. I'm sure the ads aren't too far down the road though... OK. End of my rant.
The din of the warmongers here on Slashdot has died down in the later posts (if you browse flat anyway). I would guess that they are busy watching CNN and Fox News being armchair generals. Dispicable.
This is a lot like the connundrum of what to do...
on
Strike on Iraq
·
· Score: 1
...with an animal that is ill in some ways. Some people would prefer to keep the animal alive and do what they can to ease the pain (diplomacy and sanctions). Others would want to quickly "put it out of it's misery" (going to war). Depending on the kind of person you are, you will perceive one approach or the other as the "kinder" one. That's a tough call since putting an animal to sleep is not an easy choice, but watching it suffer isn't much easier either. Personally, I'd try to keep it alive as long as possible to give it a full life since that seems to be the kinder thing to do in my opinion. I wouldn't want the animal's life on my hands. Too much to be guilty about.
Re:"Nerds" are interested in more than OSS
on
CIOs Looking At OSS
·
· Score: 1
Yup... just as I thought. Still no reply from diablobynight. I guess he didn't have anything else he could say. Woohoo! Another battle fought and won!;P
Folks... looks like we have a new troll tactic here. I've noticed that there are a few people here who seem to "kneejerk" to support Linux and OSS whilst bashing someone else's post. The odd thing is that the post they are bashing is most obviously a Linux/OSS supporter. It happened to me with a post I put here early this morning. Check my journal out to see what I am talking about. Just ignore these trolls. They are meant to confuse and move people into uglier territory. Just remember these simple facts:
Shared Source = Bad trickery Open Source = Honest alternative to the above
Hmmm... Just who is the troll here? If you chose to remain ignorant about what Microsoft is doing (no matter how wrongheaded, misguided or stupid it may be) that is your own lookout. However, I am no MS apologist. I am an OSS supporter and I think MS stinks to high heaven. This license... even moreso.
If you think M$ is accountable for anything, you must have missed item 6 and 7 varients of which which appear in ALL of their EULAs
Perhaps I should have emphasized the word "feel" in my original statement. I never said anything about MS ACTUALLY being accountable.
I just love the arrogance of it. They have demonstrated again and again they don't care about the law, but that "no matter what legal theory it's based on." takes the cake.
I agree with you 100% on this.
...the rest of your post is blather, half promotion of M$ BS, all distraction...
Blather? Promotion of MS BS? Simply because you feel that some of these ideas that I've listed don't sound useful or practical to you, doesn't mean that 90% of the "Joe Averages" out there won't think so. Most of what I posted as possible future MS targets are things that "Joe Average" is going to want... or at least be told that he wants. The only way to compete with that is provide a better alternative. In general that's what OSS has been about from the start. I hardly consider anything I said to be a promotion of MS. Most of it was more of a heads up to the OSS community saying... "Look guys! This is where we need to be looking right now". I try to keep on top of this stuff and be mindful of it when I code, others should do the same.
Troll? I think you've fallen into the same trap a lot of other Slashdot readers do. Your internal dialog, "Duh... His name is Trolling4Dollars. Must be a troll. I HATE him and everything he stands for even though I don't know a thing about him". No. I think it is you who are the troll.
The shared source license is just an attempt to pull attention away from the GPL because the GPL has Microsoft running scared. They put on a good face, but deep down they are concerned because of how much developer mindshare OSS has.
Microsoft only has a few specific goals here: 1. To distract anyone considering OSS and make them feel like there is a viable alternative from a single accountable entity. (Something that most OSS has a little trouble providing)
2. To disrupt the OSS community and have them focus more on the licenses than the code, which could have a double ended result: code forking and migration of the less "devout" to shared source.
3. To distract people from where they are headed next. I think this is the biggest reason because I think you will see the Windows code base released within the next few years with very few strings attached. Why? I must draw from Neal Stephenson's wonderful essay "In the Beggining, there was Command Line" to explain:
As software technologies progress and functionality expands, older software loses value. To the point where it is eventually worth-less. Hence, it can be free (as in beer and in parts, as in speech). Why would they do this? I think Microsoft is getting ready to transition to many other technology markets as the products they develop have less value and relevance over time.
My bets: *Data Storage Systems (Not just file systems, but transparent, intelligent data storage devices that do all the work for you: categorizing data in to types automatically, analyzing data usage and optimizing the store for nearly immediate access no matter how big the data set, etc...) *Big Iron Replacement (Windows Datacenter is just the start. They want this to kill off UNIX, VMS and other OSes like them. The datacenter is where they want to be now.) *Embedded Devices on a much grander scale than WinCE is capable of. The only thing the OS on these devices will have in common with Windows are the logo and a few graphics, but the code will be vastly different and run on completely new architectures. There wouldn't even be much point in calling it Windows anymore. *Artificially "better" performing network protocols that embrace, extend and extinguish TCP/IP. They will tune TCP/IP and add new features in it that most users will want. But these features will break the TCP/IP standard. Sure it'll work with non-MS stuff. However, as it's always been, the MS stuff will just work so much better if it's all MS. The gains in performance will likely only be a little network "Reaganomics". Shift a little performance hit here or there to make something else look better. Think about how many people think that Windows XP is a better OS than previous versions of windows only based on boot time and time to load IE. Those are not significant factors folks! The same thing will apply here.
I say, we shouldn't let MS distract us too much, but we SHOULD keep a watchful eye on where we think they might be headed because the desktop isn't going to be enough to keep them alive in a few years.
Personally, I think one of the most important things that OSS should be focussing on is the improvement and extension of input devices, that's where the next technology war will be fought on the embedded device front. Because you sure as hell aren't going to have KB, mouse or even serial port on a computer embedded in you walls, floors and clothing.
I think the preference in game type has a lot more to do with personality as opposed to what is the "best" kind of game. Personally, I don't like games like the Sims, Starcraft or Black & White. To me, the focus of the game seems to be a power grab, and that's just not me. There is nothing in my psyche that gives me any desire for power, real or imagined. However, I love a good story. That's why I think I liked Myst so much. There was a lot of rich detail in the graphics which enhanced the mystery of what happened in that space. To me, games like Myst, Riven, Exile and Lighthouse are the perfect escape. You get to immerse yourself into another world so removed from your own that you forget where you are. Turn down the lights and put on some headphones and it's almost complete. To an extent, that's also why I like the Quake series and the UT series. The thing is, I like them for the wrong reasons. I am a lot less interested in getting lots of "gibs" or scoring highly. What interests me more is the beauty of some of the environments, especially in all of the Unreal games. I basically play just to take a look around the next level and kind of pretend that I am really there. If someone makes a Myst-like environment for the first "holodeck"-like systems, I will be an addict.
Keep this in mind though: this is MY preference for a game. I am not saying that the kind of games I like are the "best" kind. The mistake that some people make is that think what they like has got to be likeable because it's "the best". They completely forget all other possible opinions.
As much as I hate NineNine's stinking and corrupted guts, he is correct. You can change the user that IIS runs as very easily. (I've only worked with IIS 4.0 up to this point) Just open the services control panel applet, scroll down to World Wide Web Publishing service and set the user account for IIS to run as.
However, I will make an observation here: NO internet server can be secured if it's shipped with default settings since default settings cannot remain secure indefinitely. If a server admin MUST explicitly specify server settings, then you will have a more secure server because it will result in uniqueness. MS is horrible at this because you can install IIS and it "just works" without the admin EVER being prompted to secure the server's configuration. I believe they've changed that a bit with IIS 5 but can't speak for it since I don't know it. But if MS really wanted to go the extra mile with security they would make the IIS lockdown tool a required PART OF THE SETUP!!!
One of the reasons that Apache is perceived as more secure than IIS is that for most people the default settings are not usable, so they HAVE to edit the config file. This forces them to notice that Apache is probably running as 'nobody' and a few other settings that they probably don't want ticked on or off. If the admin is smart, he changes this setting and uses the chroot options. (Damn wouldn't it be nice if chroot was an option in Windows?)
Slashdot Mirror
OK. This just has to be said as an annoyance to the capitalists on Slashdot:
Let the market decide! Who cares if it's inferior? As long as Joe Blow and his wife are buying and keeping the economy lubed, it doesn't really matter now does it? I mean, the very idea that you wouldn't want one burned out pixel. It doesn't affect me and it creates wealth. The guy who owns the company that made the monitor is making 50 times more than you and spreading it around by paying the employees of his company. Those employees are eventually going to go an buy a good or service from the company you work at. Keep that in mind... about 2 cents of every ten dollars comes from that big guy's pocket. So let the market decide and screw one little complaint about burnt out pixels!
The problem with forums is that you usually wind up preaching to the converted. Witness Slashdot for instance. We have several groups of converted and they all preach to each other and war with their opposition. But... nothing is ever accomplished:
-Linux vs. Windows
-MP3 vs. OGG
-Corporations are good vs. Corporations are evil
-Capitalism vs. Any other viable option
-Conservative vs. Liberal
-GNOME vs. KDE
etc...
Forums are, for the most part, a waste of time. The only real way to get your message heard (especially if it is an unpopular one) is with acts that really inconvenience others. As you said, it's a lot like spam. Those folks, as much as they should be flayed alive, are smart enough to know that their method works. Even though it inconveniences others, their message gets heard.
Sometimes the only way to get a message across is to jump up and down and yell "fire" in a crowded theater while holding up a sign saying "I oppose the War in Iraq".
...aren't there any sites that have links to hacked sites and keep archives like 2600 used to do? Has 2600 started doing that again?
What are you proposing? That I take a bus over the ocean?
I know. I thought so.
You spout misinformation and ignorance about Palestine. Why don't you go read a little history:
http://www.palestinehistory.com/
*snort*
I found this when I was looking for more information about the Palestinian people. This puts a face to some of the people that we are killing right now. Read it. Learn a little bit about them. Then tell me it's OK to bomb the hell out of that country.
It IS possible to be against the war and support the troops you trog. To those troops, I say "Godspeed!" But I still think this action is wrong. It is just a sign of the times though. Many people in the United States are extremely arrogant. I think a lot of it has to do with the tech boom in the 90s. Just because of that, they feel like the US is a great place. It USED to be pretty nice, but it gets worse every days. Too many citizens of the United States are arrogant, self-centered, greedy and xenophobic. I think a lot of people here could use a good bitchslapping. Maybe then the message will sink through. The US is not, doesn't deserve to be and never will be the empire that rules the world. Some of my personal pet peeves with the US:
-SUV Drivers who use their vehicles to carry two grocery bags a mile and a half down the road. (I drive a used Nissan Sentra that gets decent gas mileage.)
-Lunatic gun owners who *think* they know what a militia means in today's society. Although their argument about needing to overthrow an unjust government is starting to have some validity these days.
-Corporate types who seem to think that profit at any cost is a worthwhile thing. Always arguing that when they make money, their underlings make money. Tell that to the single mother working at McDonalds for peanuts and living in a shithole hovel. We REALLY need to re-evaluate the damage that was done to the welfare system by the conservatives.
-The general asshole that seems to be more prevalent in our society. You know the type. The guy with an IQ of 20 going around saying "I RULE!!" when he displays some violent act of agression. Or the woman who thinks she "rules" when she puts other women down.
In general the United States has become a VERY ugly place.
What? Wait two minutes? I don't get it?
Anyway. I wouldn't say that I am your personal troll. I think it's the other way around considering how many arrogant and ridiculous posts you've been making as AC to my other account.
You get what you asked for and you are pretty predictable to boot. So much fun to manipulate you.
So... you, as an avowed conservative, are saying that Clinton was doing the right thing in 1998?
Well then, by transitive property, that means all the Repugs who were making fun of Clinton and bashing those actions back then (Think Rush Limbaugh for one) were on the wrong side of the coin. So does that make you and the rest of your conservative brothers two-faced? I think so!!!
You'll happily bash and ridicule a liberal, but your conservative god GWB can't be touched. Fucking hypocrites and liars... every one of you.
You probably prefer Windows over Linux as well. My god you ARE an asshole aren't you?
I think it's time for a MODBOMB!!!!
Just call him what he is: A dyslexic alcoholic Texan with a low IQ.
HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Truer words have never been spoken. If only there were a way (that I could afford) to leave the former United States of America...
Applause! This is THE ONLY reasonable post I've seen amongst these comments. The major point is that EVERYONE has an agenda and they are all trying to push it. Bush does, Saddam does, Chirac does, etc... This is something that gets lost in all the polarization that takes place in This vs. That arguments. The war and the motives behind it on all sides are no exception. Someone PLEASE mod the parent up!!!!
You can choose to ignore this if you want, but I need to say it: What really repulses me about the way we treat war after "Desert Storm" is that they are almost trying to make it into a Reality TV experience now. It's a fucking travesty. News and information about it is one thing, but is a play by play really necessary? I am certain that we now have armchair generals saying how they would have done things differently. The only things missing are half-time and the expensive ads. I'm sure the ads aren't too far down the road though... OK. End of my rant.
The din of the warmongers here on Slashdot has died down in the later posts (if you browse flat anyway). I would guess that they are busy watching CNN and Fox News being armchair generals. Dispicable.
...with an animal that is ill in some ways. Some people would prefer to keep the animal alive and do what they can to ease the pain (diplomacy and sanctions). Others would want to quickly "put it out of it's misery" (going to war). Depending on the kind of person you are, you will perceive one approach or the other as the "kinder" one. That's a tough call since putting an animal to sleep is not an easy choice, but watching it suffer isn't much easier either. Personally, I'd try to keep it alive as long as possible to give it a full life since that seems to be the kinder thing to do in my opinion. I wouldn't want the animal's life on my hands. Too much to be guilty about.
It all depends on how you define "win"...
Yup... just as I thought. Still no reply from diablobynight. I guess he didn't have anything else he could say. Woohoo! Another battle fought and won! ;P
What does this have to do with Trollip? Are you a friend of his?
Folks... looks like we have a new troll tactic here. I've noticed that there are a few people here who seem to "kneejerk" to support Linux and OSS whilst bashing someone else's post. The odd thing is that the post they are bashing is most obviously a Linux/OSS supporter. It happened to me with a post I put here early this morning. Check my journal out to see what I am talking about. Just ignore these trolls. They are meant to confuse and move people into uglier territory. Just remember these simple facts:
Shared Source = Bad trickery
Open Source = Honest alternative to the above
Hmmm... Just who is the troll here? If you chose to remain ignorant about what Microsoft is doing (no matter how wrongheaded, misguided or stupid it may be) that is your own lookout. However, I am no MS apologist. I am an OSS supporter and I think MS stinks to high heaven. This license... even moreso.
If you think M$ is accountable for anything, you must have missed item 6 and 7 varients of which which appear in ALL of their EULAs
Perhaps I should have emphasized the word "feel" in my original statement. I never said anything about MS ACTUALLY being accountable.
I just love the arrogance of it. They have demonstrated again and again they don't care about the law, but that "no matter what legal theory it's based on." takes the cake.
I agree with you 100% on this.
Blather? Promotion of MS BS? Simply because you feel that some of these ideas that I've listed don't sound useful or practical to you, doesn't mean that 90% of the "Joe Averages" out there won't think so. Most of what I posted as possible future MS targets are things that "Joe Average" is going to want... or at least be told that he wants. The only way to compete with that is provide a better alternative. In general that's what OSS has been about from the start. I hardly consider anything I said to be a promotion of MS. Most of it was more of a heads up to the OSS community saying... "Look guys! This is where we need to be looking right now". I try to keep on top of this stuff and be mindful of it when I code, others should do the same.
Troll? I think you've fallen into the same trap a lot of other Slashdot readers do. Your internal dialog, "Duh... His name is Trolling4Dollars. Must be a troll. I HATE him and everything he stands for even though I don't know a thing about him". No. I think it is you who are the troll.
The shared source license is just an attempt to pull attention away from the GPL because the GPL has Microsoft running scared. They put on a good face, but deep down they are concerned because of how much developer mindshare OSS has.
Microsoft only has a few specific goals here:
1. To distract anyone considering OSS and make them feel like there is a viable alternative from a single accountable entity. (Something that most OSS has a little trouble providing)
2. To disrupt the OSS community and have them focus more on the licenses than the code, which could have a double ended result: code forking and migration of the less "devout" to shared source.
3. To distract people from where they are headed next. I think this is the biggest reason because I think you will see the Windows code base released within the next few years with very few strings attached. Why? I must draw from Neal Stephenson's wonderful essay "In the Beggining, there was Command Line" to explain:
As software technologies progress and functionality expands, older software loses value. To the point where it is eventually worth-less. Hence, it can be free (as in beer and in parts, as in speech). Why would they do this? I think Microsoft is getting ready to transition to many other technology markets as the products they develop have less value and relevance over time.
My bets:
*Data Storage Systems (Not just file systems, but transparent, intelligent data storage devices that do all the work for you: categorizing data in to types automatically, analyzing data usage and optimizing the store for nearly immediate access no matter how big the data set, etc...)
*Big Iron Replacement (Windows Datacenter is just the start. They want this to kill off UNIX, VMS and other OSes like them. The datacenter is where they want to be now.)
*Embedded Devices on a much grander scale than WinCE is capable of. The only thing the OS on these devices will have in common with Windows are the logo and a few graphics, but the code will be vastly different and run on completely new architectures. There wouldn't even be much point in calling it Windows anymore.
*Artificially "better" performing network protocols that embrace, extend and extinguish TCP/IP. They will tune TCP/IP and add new features in it that most users will want. But these features will break the TCP/IP standard. Sure it'll work with non-MS stuff. However, as it's always been, the MS stuff will just work so much better if it's all MS. The gains in performance will likely only be a little network "Reaganomics". Shift a little performance hit here or there to make something else look better. Think about how many people think that Windows XP is a better OS than previous versions of windows only based on boot time and time to load IE. Those are not significant factors folks! The same thing will apply here.
I say, we shouldn't let MS distract us too much, but we SHOULD keep a watchful eye on where we think they might be headed because the desktop isn't going to be enough to keep them alive in a few years.
Personally, I think one of the most important things that OSS should be focussing on is the improvement and extension of input devices, that's where the next technology war will be fought on the embedded device front. Because you sure as hell aren't going to have KB, mouse or even serial port on a computer embedded in you walls, floors and clothing.
I think the preference in game type has a lot more to do with personality as opposed to what is the "best" kind of game. Personally, I don't like games like the Sims, Starcraft or Black & White. To me, the focus of the game seems to be a power grab, and that's just not me. There is nothing in my psyche that gives me any desire for power, real or imagined. However, I love a good story. That's why I think I liked Myst so much. There was a lot of rich detail in the graphics which enhanced the mystery of what happened in that space. To me, games like Myst, Riven, Exile and Lighthouse are the perfect escape. You get to immerse yourself into another world so removed from your own that you forget where you are. Turn down the lights and put on some headphones and it's almost complete. To an extent, that's also why I like the Quake series and the UT series. The thing is, I like them for the wrong reasons. I am a lot less interested in getting lots of "gibs" or scoring highly. What interests me more is the beauty of some of the environments, especially in all of the Unreal games. I basically play just to take a look around the next level and kind of pretend that I am really there. If someone makes a Myst-like environment for the first "holodeck"-like systems, I will be an addict.
Keep this in mind though: this is MY preference for a game. I am not saying that the kind of games I like are the "best" kind. The mistake that some people make is that think what they like has got to be likeable because it's "the best". They completely forget all other possible opinions.
Why would we want to call him President? He DIDN'T win. He stole the election. There are lots of other things we could call him though...
As much as I hate NineNine's stinking and corrupted guts, he is correct. You can change the user that IIS runs as very easily. (I've only worked with IIS 4.0 up to this point) Just open the services control panel applet, scroll down to World Wide Web Publishing service and set the user account for IIS to run as.
However, I will make an observation here: NO internet server can be secured if it's shipped with default settings since default settings cannot remain secure indefinitely. If a server admin MUST explicitly specify server settings, then you will have a more secure server because it will result in uniqueness. MS is horrible at this because you can install IIS and it "just works" without the admin EVER being prompted to secure the server's configuration. I believe they've changed that a bit with IIS 5 but can't speak for it since I don't know it. But if MS really wanted to go the extra mile with security they would make the IIS lockdown tool a required PART OF THE SETUP!!!
One of the reasons that Apache is perceived as more secure than IIS is that for most people the default settings are not usable, so they HAVE to edit the config file. This forces them to notice that Apache is probably running as 'nobody' and a few other settings that they probably don't want ticked on or off. If the admin is smart, he changes this setting and uses the chroot options. (Damn wouldn't it be nice if chroot was an option in Windows?)