Ok, this is happening in Europe. That is, across the ocean.
DOJ is like shit outside there, no one could care less. What is important, tho, is the fact that, in order to sell to public institutions (like a university), the manufacturer (DELL) has to provide a WORKING system.
What does WORKING means? That you have to pull it out of the box, attach to a power socket, flick the switch and *something* happens. This something could be a OS boot or a network connection to find a server, in any case, the system should be able to perform a grade of useful activity right out of the box.
This means that DELL cannot sell a PC without OS. They could be sued from here to hell if somebody wants to do that.
As for their decision to install Windows instead of Linux, that's exclusively their business choice, but they CANNOT sell PC without OS. It's against the law in the EU.
First off, W2K isn't that frightening- especially after Jesse Berst has all but declared it DOA. W2K won't solve any of the fundamental problems- mainly stability and cost- which are driving people away from NT and towards Linux.
Ohmygod... one day mr. Berst is the stupidest man on earth and the day after the same mr. Berst is a validated opinion maker deciding about the fate of OSs?! Please, at least keep some consistence in your ideas...
There are two ways Microsoft can keep this rate of growth- one, they can find and conquer billions of dollars a year in new markets (tricky, even for Microsoft), or they can simply force their customers to disgorge more money for the same products.
One word: cable/xDSL (ok, two words, so sue me:)
Microsoft is going to great length to assure they will be in the computing/communication industry even if their OS/Apps vanish overnight. Who knows what the "impartial" judge Jackson may decide...
Either way, however, you don't dare give something away for free that you used to sell- this is just ups the amount you have to grow everything else. Which is why I don't think they'll give away IIS for free.
Knock-knock! Are you postulating that they will charge for IIS? If so, do you have anything to back your claims or you simply had to spread FUDx? (yeah, Linux FUD:) (ok, this doesn't have anything to do with Linux, but gimme some slack...)
Third, there is already a "cool new feature" in IIS/Explorer- it's called "ActiveX". And no one, outside of Microsoft, uses it. Because the fundamental reason to have a web page is for people to look at it- why deny 10%, or 25%, or 50% of your potiential eyeballs simply to use CoolNewFeature?
True. The ActiveX strategy for the web failed, but you have to keep in mind that it's a core concept behind the whole OS (either Win9x and WinNT/2K). Extending the inner functionality of the OS across the web seems, to me at least, a natural thing to do. After all, web servers and file servers are built exactly for this reason. There is more than one way to do it, tho, and while MS didn't succeed (sp?) with extending their OS across the net, neither did any other OS. At the moment, the battle is stalled.
One of the reasons for this, I think, is the existence of so many extension modules for Apache. Is there any such thing as mod_perl, FastCGI, PHP for IIS? (I really don't know.) A heavily loaded site can hardly get by without tools like these.
The functionalities of mod_perl are provided by the ActiveState PerlScript port. FastCGI is a "process" concept, IIS uses a different approach to CGIs, kinda linked to "threads" (thos words are quoted not like "laser", but because it's very early in the morning and I don't have enough brain working to find the right concept...)
PHP3 works perfectly fine on IIS and PWS.
BTW, IIS ships with NT since a while ago. What's the fuss now? Option Pack 4 gives you versions of IIS for NT Server, Workstation and Win95/98. The server engine is the same (almost), so, again, what's new?
Maybe the aussie student should have done his researches before....
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, this is happening in Europe. That is, across the ocean.
DOJ is like shit outside there, no one could care less. What is important, tho, is the fact that, in order to sell to public institutions (like a university), the manufacturer (DELL) has to provide a WORKING system.
What does WORKING means? That you have to pull it out of the box, attach to a power socket, flick the switch and *something* happens. This something could be a OS boot or a network connection to find a server, in any case, the system should be able to perform a grade of useful activity right out of the box.
This means that DELL cannot sell a PC without OS. They could be sued from here to hell if somebody wants to do that.
As for their decision to install Windows instead of Linux, that's exclusively their business choice, but they CANNOT sell PC without OS. It's against the law in the EU.
Just to prove that I'm not smoking crack, read this
--TPx
Of course, you know that AOL 5.0 is based on the IE ActiveX control, right?
--TPx
First off, W2K isn't that frightening- especially after Jesse Berst has all but declared it DOA. W2K won't solve any of the fundamental problems- mainly stability and cost- which are driving people away from NT and towards Linux.
:)
:) (ok, this doesn't have anything to do with Linux, but gimme some slack...)
Ohmygod... one day mr. Berst is the stupidest man on earth and the day after the same mr. Berst is a validated opinion maker deciding about the fate of OSs?! Please, at least keep some consistence in your ideas...
There are two ways Microsoft can keep this rate of growth- one, they can find and conquer billions of dollars a year in new markets (tricky, even for Microsoft), or they can simply force their customers to disgorge more money for the same products.
One word: cable/xDSL (ok, two words, so sue me
Microsoft is going to great length to assure they will be in the computing/communication industry even if their OS/Apps vanish overnight. Who knows what the "impartial" judge Jackson may decide...
Either way, however, you don't dare give something away for free that you used to sell- this is just ups the amount you have to grow everything else. Which is why I don't think they'll give away IIS for free.
Knock-knock! Are you postulating that they will charge for IIS? If so, do you have anything to back your claims or you simply had to spread FUDx? (yeah, Linux FUD
Third, there is already a "cool new feature" in IIS/Explorer- it's called "ActiveX". And no one, outside of Microsoft, uses it. Because the fundamental reason to have a web page is for people to look at it- why deny 10%, or 25%, or 50% of your potiential eyeballs simply to use CoolNewFeature?
True. The ActiveX strategy for the web failed, but you have to keep in mind that it's a core concept behind the whole OS (either Win9x and WinNT/2K). Extending the inner functionality of the OS across the web seems, to me at least, a natural thing to do. After all, web servers and file servers are built exactly for this reason. There is more than one way to do it, tho, and while MS didn't succeed (sp?) with extending their OS across the net, neither did any other OS. At the moment, the battle is stalled.
TPx
One of the reasons for this, I think, is the existence of so many extension modules for Apache. Is there any such thing as mod_perl, FastCGI, PHP for IIS? (I really don't know.) A heavily loaded site can hardly get by without tools like these.
The functionalities of mod_perl are provided by the ActiveState PerlScript port.
FastCGI is a "process" concept, IIS uses a different approach to CGIs, kinda linked to "threads" (thos words are quoted not like "laser", but because it's very early in the morning and I don't have enough brain working to find the right concept...)
PHP3 works perfectly fine on IIS and PWS.
BTW, IIS ships with NT since a while ago. What's the fuss now? Option Pack 4 gives you versions of IIS for NT Server, Workstation and Win95/98. The server engine is the same (almost), so, again, what's new?
Maybe the aussie student should have done his researches before....
Uhm... Win2000 is not really bloated, if for bloat you mean slow. It runs well and stable.
As for Windows 2001, are you referring to Neptune or the successor of Win2000? They're on different codebases...
-TPx