There's no pat answer to that. Other's have already replied but this windows works out of the box all the time stuff bugs me. A few years ago we bought a couple of boxes with promise ata raid controllers. I don't recall the specific model. But redhat 7.1 handled it with ease and the box is in production use. The win2k o/s never did handle it reliably. Even when it would install the performance hit was huge. That was one win2k box that never made it into production.
These compatibility issues cut both ways and MS isn't always the winner.
Ok not bad for a first effort.
on
Fedora Core 2 Review
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Except that it's not a first effort.
I've been a redhat fan since 4.something. We still use it at work and I use it at home. I intend to stick with fedora and have no plans to jump ship. That may change if future releases follow the quality of this one.
I fell afoul of the partition table issue with core1 which caused me two evenings of hair pulling prior to figuring out a way to save things. That plus a couple of hours of win updates to repair the win xp installation. A very minor part of that process was to force the boot loader to be lilo and not grub. Small thing but it was material to saving everything imo.
The announcement the other day noted this partition table issue still existed. Not to be put off by the issue I mentally resolved how I got around it last time and how I'd approach it this time. Off we go.... I certainly avoided grub but geeeze the 'upgrade' to lilo meant I couldn't boot Core2! The upgrade process 'upgraded'/boot/message to be nonexistant so the machine would only boot to the default win xp. It's a very minor issue and it was easily resolved but I am blown away that Core2 comes with two means in which to make your system not usuable.
Similarly I tried the upgrade on a test machine here in the office just this morning. I was ready for/boot/message this time on top of everything else... But would it boot? Heck no! The misreading of the partition table resulted in it dying when it tried to reboot after the upgrade (from rh9) since it now thought the previously acceptable boot partition had too high a cylinder number.
I'm trying a complete install as I type... Fingers crossed but only time will tell.
As I said I intend to stick with redhat/fedora for the forseeable future but if this type of scenario is repeated on future releases then I will be off to greener pastures. I went with linux to avoid quality issues with M$ products (whether you agree or not). I won't stick with this distro if the quality goes down hill. Every dog gets one bite and this is redhat's
For those who don't want to heed your advice about not installing I'd suggest they use lilo and change their bios settings to remove hdd auto detection. Set the params manually instead. That was the eventual solution I used to get around the problem with RC1. Those who lost all their data probably did themselves in by trying inappropriate corrective action to repair their partitions. I've hit several variations of the problem and lost nothing *except* on one system I had to recover xp and lost some of the patches. But no data or settings. I know I'm being unkind but losing data should not be a result of a damaged, but repairable, partition table.
Hmmm 113202 shows as some unicode issue as far as I can see but I was bitten by 115980.
I can't say it will work for everyone, wrt 115980, but after much teeth and hair pulling I discovered that changing my bios settings for hdd's from auto to lba32 resolved the issue right away. Something worth a shot for anyone who falls foul of it.
I assume you're talking about the SCO case though regardless of your example. In the SCO case SCO was making public statements. In Germany a local linux organization or group (not sure of their exact status) took SCO to court.
Under their laws they were, in layman's terms, request an order that SCO put up or shut up. If SCO had put up they could have continued to talk about it and as well taken whatever action they felt necessary under the law. But SCO failed after the court gave them the grace period to provide some proof. The judge then issued the shut up order as the law provides.
I agree you want to know when you're infringing someone elses rights. In the US as in Germany people involved in Linux have been saying please tell us where it is and we'll remove your property . SCO has refused, so far.
At the same time would you want ACME Software House running around screaming that code you wrote was theirs? I doubt it. You'd better hire some lawyers and get cracking... And face the loss of business while ACME is lying... You don't have the benefit of a put up or shut up law to deal with those types of criminals. And SCO are criminals. Maybe not by criminal law but by any accepted moral standard.
He didn't need to recompile the kernel if he was using RH9. He did need to download and install a third party rpm in order to get it to work though.
http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/rpm/redhat9.ht ml
It would be nice if the ntfs support could come with the distribution but with the potential licensing/patent issues I can understand why they're reluctant.
I'm also not personally recommending a lot of write access to ntfs with the package since it seems to not as widely used as incorporated rpm's are. I stand to be corrected on that though.
I'm running rh9 and win xp pro. I access my xp ntfs partition quiet easily with it (above rpm) and it came in quite handy when grub trounced my partition table on the primary drive during an install of a fedora core release. I have two drives with XP on the primary drive, and I use the second drive for testing out various linux dists and rh9 (or whatever my main current flavour). I also keep a 10GB partition on that second drive formatted in fat32 for transfers between the various o/s's should I want to use it.
YMMV as always.
I smell money
on
Gates on Spam
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
For the sake of argument let's assume Gate's has perfect vision and the world is going to cooperate, perhaps with some nudging, and it gets implemented and is effective.
Well there are all sorts of existing technology that could limit spam rates, stop client boxes from using unauthorized services, or unapproved domains, send auth... I'm not suggesting any of those things are or are not appropriate. Just that they do indeed exist and what's lacking is the will and cooperation. And without that his approach will not make things better. There are much easier ways to extend existing standards where that is needed.
It may slow the rate of growth but it won't stop the flood.
What it will generate though is more impetus to force older technology users to upgrade. And most likely servers will need to be upgraded as well. The cost will be insignificant to the spam kings who profit. Not even a bump really.
Of course we could ensure some sort of reliable client identification process is built it... Ooops that's a good benefit to DRM as well! What luck! And stopping spam is a good sales pitch.
Nah I haven't argued all the points. There are some good ideas out there as to how to stop spam in general.
But Gate's approach is let's all spend more money on more technology even though the gesture in the long run will be futile. Just because we can't cooperate on these things today doesn't mean we won't if we all spend more money on it (true but not plausible).
And with proper design we can eliminate this pesky free email too. Does he really think I'd ever pay for hotmail?
There is a cost to switching from wp to openoffice.
We've (the company I work for) been a wp user since the early 80's. We have in excess of a million word perfect documents many of which we would need continued access into the forseeable future. We simply can't leave them behind in order to switch ship. While there are ways to do that conversion the cost in mantime alone is fairly prohibitive.
We've been following open office fairly closely and they've come a long way in terms of their wp connector. It's not quite there yet but it's close.
Once we consider it to be a usable state for us then we can look at using OO on a go forward basis for new systems.
It's my understanding that the sun version of wp will do conversions but as wp has been a good product for us there's no incentive for us to try to skimp a few dollars based on the price difference between wp and OO. For us the major incentive with OO will be we can consider switching from windows to linux.
I agree with you if you never want any support from either redhat or MS. On top of that though you should also factor in the cost of additional CALS, over and above the typical 5(?) that MS provides, if applicable. Especially if it's going to require application CALS on top of the basic access. With open source you can avoid CALS in the most part (some specific applications do have CAL pricing structure)
If you do want support as well as patches from either then the comparison of base costs alone isn't sufficient.
FWIW the last time they published these numbers they used www.zone-h-org as the basis. That site tracks web site defacements only. I'm not totally sure of their methodolgy for counting virtual hosts (ie is a single box hacked counted as 1 or many site hacks) but I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere. Further zone-h is reliant on defacing groups to report their acheivements.
So yeah.... It's a very selective subset of what the article attempts to purport that the data represents.
Generally speaking you'll have prosecutors wishing to discuss 'Receiving Stolen Goods' with you. That's certainly the case with your car parts although they may not proceed if they feel you were unaware. But it certainly is illegal.
I'm not convinced it's illegal with copyrighted property. But I am convinced it's immoral and unethical. I'm a M$ hater and make no bones about it but to stoop to that which is plainly unethical, even if not illegal, just shouldn't be contemplated. And it makes no difference that M$ is unethical.
Laws shouldn't preclude people from doing the right thing.
Keep in mind this case is about AT activity where MS has been accused of leveraging their technologies into new markets.
Assuming MS continues it's current bundling practice. What products are content providers likely to select, especially when you factor DRM, into the picture once mediaplayer is installed on 95% of the desktop market?
The simple answer is that they will select win media server and the wmv format. While media player does, and has supported other formats it's within MS's track record to 'degrade' the experience in anything other than what they're pushing.
I'm kinda stuck for time today so I'll stop being long winded and suggest that people give some thought into whether mediaplayer domination becomes a lever for server market penetration and content control/taxation.
Another irony in this article is that the author is either unaware or overlooked the undetected internal network breach that MS incurred in, I believe, 2000. Could it be the source of the leaked code in the other article (I can't access it and haven't read the posts)? Perhaps.
That breach was, by varying accounts, 9-12 weeks in duration. No small amount of time for those with ill intent.
Was code tampered with? Is there even now code in there that is malicious? At the time there were a variety of accounts from different executives. They got the code, they may have, they didn't. Who knows which was true. It's a 'faith based' system in that we have to believe them with no verification.
Have there been other breaches? Will we ever know? How long will they last before they're detected?
" Inevitably, that choice will lead to security breaches that will cost those same governments (and ultimately you), huge amounts of money to rectify."
I'll agree with him on this point but at the same time this really proves that the article is mere FUD pablum.
Security breaches have cost Corporations, Governments, Individuals time and huge amounts of money for years. With windows, unix, linux, even some of the old stalwart mainframe o/s's. They will continue to do so whether due to software flaws or administrative error. Readers can decide for themselves which ones have cost more.
Oh! It's A Russell Jones and not 'W'. Amusingly enough W Russell Jones is Utah securities company facing a fraud case witrh SEC..... Is it the water over there?
I'm far from a kid and use Linux in a work environment. We also use OS/390, VMS, and yes Win9/2k/XP.
The "M$" has little to do with Linux. It has everything to do with M$ and it's defacto monopoly, it's penchant for sucking the cash cow, and showing that ogranization the respect it 'deserves'.
And when will you windoze kiddies learn it's Linux and not Lunix and that the gpl isn't viral (or we'd have windows on gpl - see MS services for Unix and in particular it's gpl components), that proprietary (and paid for!) software can be purchased for it. And that it supports most hardware. We actually did better with linux than with Win2K, driver wise, back when they were both new.
On the issue... A six monthg turnaround? You must be kidding me! It was only a week ago Bill was, falsely, claiming a one day turnaround versus weeks for Linux (typically it's less than a day).
Any windows setup, mine included, was a potential target for abuse due to this. You have to trust M$ employees not to leak it, the finding company's employees not to leak it, and the black hats community to not find it.
That is a ridiculous situation for any company to be in and it's unsatisfactory performance for any software supplier let alone one who tries to claim they're the best... M$ showed zero respect for the operations of your organization and zero respect to each and every individual customer by allowing them to face that risk without warning.
I would never trust our critical business operations to Microsoft. They have repeatedly violated that trust.
It amuses me that people think fox is fair and balanced. Perhaps they're right and I'm wrong.
If you search for something along the lines of fox bht scandal right to lie you may change your mind.
You should find a lawsuit the general gist of which is a couple of reporters investigated implications of using bht in the food chain. Before the report was aired monsanto, a good fox advertiser, raised objections about the report and fox ordered the reporters to modify and provide false information in their coverage. The reporters refused and were fired resulting in the dismissal lawsuit.
Neither the dismissal, the lawsuit nor the health impacts are relevant.
What is relevant is that the reporters were ordered to lie. Fox did not dispute this. What they did argue is that they have a right to order their reporters to lie in their news coverage and that they (fox) have a constitutional right to lie.
Fair and balanced? I doubt it. I might change my mind if anyone can ever show me other major news sources that have done this and argued this 'right'. No one ever has been able to though.
I can see it now
"No Mom you have to modify the registry by running regedit and changing the dword to a hex 3. Then you need to boot safe mode log in as Administrator and modify the group policies. When was the last time you ran winupdate and rebooted> What?? No NO! Argggh!....I know you can barely use your computer but just think how INsecure you are from these nasty links!"
" The cost of these things is therefore irrelevant to the actual OS."
That's asinine. Regardless of the reason MS systems are targetted those things are a cost to any individual or oganization. And the cost which will be incurred as a result of adopting any solution are totally relevant. I'd add to the original posters list the cost of downtime as well.
They are actually one of the larger single recurring costs we encounter organization wide as they impact on every pc as opposed to cad on a subset of boxes, or graphics software on another handfil, etc.
I always do it for free and I'm ok with that. Those I don't consider friends I say Geeee I don't know and point them in the right direction.
With that said though I do begin to resent those who *expect* it for free... That attitude gets under my skin and they soon lose my help.
I have one aunt who likes to sneak money into my wife's coat pocket. It never comes close to what my time is worth frankly but the thought works wonders.
"+ Realistically, the software & hardware costs aren't going to be significantly different between Windows and Linux."
Except for small business i disagree with that assumption. Once you factor in the cost of CALS and applications the cost difference can be substantial. I guess where you can buy a license for win2k server, for example, and not have to buy a boatload of cals you might have a point. And we won't get into office....
"There might be some scenarios where it makes sense, but for the most part a mainframe has pathetic price/performance"
Price/performance isn't what push people into the mainframe market so the point is moot.
I have no trouble finding cars without A/C. But I've yet to find one without a heater (and wouldn't want to).
You're issue is dealers stocking what the local market wants.
"You don't pay for Media Player, you can download it for free. you don't pay extra for IE either. They are little freebies:"
They are not free. They are in the price. Sure you can download them for free but for 7 years you have also had to pay for them with your license. There are not a lot of non windows users downloading windows software to run on nonwindows operating systems.
That is part, and only part, of what's objectionable. The consumer who doesn't want those extra is subsidizing the developement and support of those who do. And the included in the price aspect precludes real competition from anyone who needs to charge more than zero dollars to stay in business.
It's all part of the lock in and competition avoidance that we see all the time from MS.
"Email is not an assault, unless the person says they're gonna hurt you, and you have some reason to believe that they are not kidding around."
Merely threatening someone is not a crime afaik. So you have the ability to vent. If however the recipient has reason to believe that you are serious and are reasonably able to carry out the threat then it becomes a crime.
Besides you can vent your anger without threatening assault or violence. Venting itself is rather silly but venting by suggesting violence you have no intent on carrying out is purely juvenile.
He wasn't much of a programmer either obviously, installing inappropriate apps, inability to stop pop ups (whether that was ie or open ports on his system).
Maybe he can use 'a time out' to get a decent education in his supposed field.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no pat answer to that. Other's have already replied but this windows works out of the box all the time stuff bugs me. A few years ago we bought a couple of boxes with promise ata raid controllers. I don't recall the specific model. But redhat 7.1 handled it with ease and the box is in production use. The win2k o/s never did handle it reliably. Even when it would install the performance hit was huge. That was one win2k box that never made it into production. These compatibility issues cut both ways and MS isn't always the winner.
Except that it's not a first effort. I've been a redhat fan since 4.something. We still use it at work and I use it at home. I intend to stick with fedora and have no plans to jump ship. That may change if future releases follow the quality of this one. I fell afoul of the partition table issue with core1 which caused me two evenings of hair pulling prior to figuring out a way to save things. That plus a couple of hours of win updates to repair the win xp installation. A very minor part of that process was to force the boot loader to be lilo and not grub. Small thing but it was material to saving everything imo. The announcement the other day noted this partition table issue still existed. Not to be put off by the issue I mentally resolved how I got around it last time and how I'd approach it this time. Off we go.... I certainly avoided grub but geeeze the 'upgrade' to lilo meant I couldn't boot Core2! The upgrade process 'upgraded' /boot/message to be nonexistant so the machine would only boot to the default win xp. It's a very minor issue and it was easily resolved but I am blown away that Core2 comes with two means in which to make your system not usuable.
Similarly I tried the upgrade on a test machine here in the office just this morning. I was ready for /boot/message this time on top of everything else... But would it boot? Heck no! The misreading of the partition table resulted in it dying when it tried to reboot after the upgrade (from rh9) since it now thought the previously acceptable boot partition had too high a cylinder number.
I'm trying a complete install as I type... Fingers crossed but only time will tell.
As I said I intend to stick with redhat/fedora for the forseeable future but if this type of scenario is repeated on future releases then I will be off to greener pastures. I went with linux to avoid quality issues with M$ products (whether you agree or not). I won't stick with this distro if the quality goes down hill. Every dog gets one bite and this is redhat's
For those who don't want to heed your advice about not installing I'd suggest they use lilo and change their bios settings to remove hdd auto detection. Set the params manually instead. That was the eventual solution I used to get around the problem with RC1. Those who lost all their data probably did themselves in by trying inappropriate corrective action to repair their partitions. I've hit several variations of the problem and lost nothing *except* on one system I had to recover xp and lost some of the patches. But no data or settings. I know I'm being unkind but losing data should not be a result of a damaged, but repairable, partition table.
Hmmm 113202 shows as some unicode issue as far as I can see but I was bitten by 115980.
I can't say it will work for everyone, wrt 115980, but after much teeth and hair pulling I discovered that changing my bios settings for hdd's from auto to lba32 resolved the issue right away. Something worth a shot for anyone who falls foul of it.
I assume you're talking about the SCO case though regardless of your example. In the SCO case SCO was making public statements. In Germany a local linux organization or group (not sure of their exact status) took SCO to court.
Under their laws they were, in layman's terms, request an order that SCO put up or shut up. If SCO had put up they could have continued to talk about it and as well taken whatever action they felt necessary under the law. But SCO failed after the court gave them the grace period to provide some proof. The judge then issued the shut up order as the law provides.
I agree you want to know when you're infringing someone elses rights. In the US as in Germany people involved in Linux have been saying please tell us where it is and we'll remove your property . SCO has refused, so far.
At the same time would you want ACME Software House running around screaming that code you wrote was theirs? I doubt it. You'd better hire some lawyers and get cracking... And face the loss of business while ACME is lying... You don't have the benefit of a put up or shut up law to deal with those types of criminals. And SCO are criminals. Maybe not by criminal law but by any accepted moral standard.
He didn't need to recompile the kernel if he was using RH9. He did need to download and install a third party rpm in order to get it to work though.
t ml
http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/rpm/redhat9.h
It would be nice if the ntfs support could come with the distribution but with the potential licensing/patent issues I can understand why they're reluctant.
I'm also not personally recommending a lot of write access to ntfs with the package since it seems to not as widely used as incorporated rpm's are. I stand to be corrected on that though.
I'm running rh9 and win xp pro. I access my xp ntfs partition quiet easily with it (above rpm) and it came in quite handy when grub trounced my partition table on the primary drive during an install of a fedora core release. I have two drives with XP on the primary drive, and I use the second drive for testing out various linux dists and rh9 (or whatever my main current flavour). I also keep a 10GB partition on that second drive formatted in fat32 for transfers between the various o/s's should I want to use it.
YMMV as always.
For the sake of argument let's assume Gate's has perfect vision and the world is going to cooperate, perhaps with some nudging, and it gets implemented and is effective.
Well there are all sorts of existing technology that could limit spam rates, stop client boxes from using unauthorized services, or unapproved domains, send auth... I'm not suggesting any of those things are or are not appropriate. Just that they do indeed exist and what's lacking is the will and cooperation. And without that his approach will not make things better. There are much easier ways to extend existing standards where that is needed.
It may slow the rate of growth but it won't stop the flood.
What it will generate though is more impetus to force older technology users to upgrade. And most likely servers will need to be upgraded as well. The cost will be insignificant to the spam kings who profit. Not even a bump really.
Of course we could ensure some sort of reliable client identification process is built it... Ooops that's a good benefit to DRM as well! What luck! And stopping spam is a good sales pitch.
Nah I haven't argued all the points. There are some good ideas out there as to how to stop spam in general.
But Gate's approach is let's all spend more money on more technology even though the gesture in the long run will be futile. Just because we can't cooperate on these things today doesn't mean we won't if we all spend more money on it (true but not plausible).
And with proper design we can eliminate this pesky free email too. Does he really think I'd ever pay for hotmail?
There is a cost to switching from wp to openoffice. We've (the company I work for) been a wp user since the early 80's. We have in excess of a million word perfect documents many of which we would need continued access into the forseeable future. We simply can't leave them behind in order to switch ship. While there are ways to do that conversion the cost in mantime alone is fairly prohibitive.
We've been following open office fairly closely and they've come a long way in terms of their wp connector. It's not quite there yet but it's close.
Once we consider it to be a usable state for us then we can look at using OO on a go forward basis for new systems.
It's my understanding that the sun version of wp will do conversions but as wp has been a good product for us there's no incentive for us to try to skimp a few dollars based on the price difference between wp and OO. For us the major incentive with OO will be we can consider switching from windows to linux.
I agree with you if you never want any support from either redhat or MS. On top of that though you should also factor in the cost of additional CALS, over and above the typical 5(?) that MS provides, if applicable. Especially if it's going to require application CALS on top of the basic access. With open source you can avoid CALS in the most part (some specific applications do have CAL pricing structure)
If you do want support as well as patches from either then the comparison of base costs alone isn't sufficient.
FWIW the last time they published these numbers they used www.zone-h-org as the basis. That site tracks web site defacements only. I'm not totally sure of their methodolgy for counting virtual hosts (ie is a single box hacked counted as 1 or many site hacks) but I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere. Further zone-h is reliant on defacing groups to report their acheivements.
So yeah.... It's a very selective subset of what the article attempts to purport that the data represents.
Generally speaking you'll have prosecutors wishing to discuss 'Receiving Stolen Goods' with you. That's certainly the case with your car parts although they may not proceed if they feel you were unaware. But it certainly is illegal.
I'm not convinced it's illegal with copyrighted property. But I am convinced it's immoral and unethical. I'm a M$ hater and make no bones about it but to stoop to that which is plainly unethical, even if not illegal, just shouldn't be contemplated. And it makes no difference that M$ is unethical.
Laws shouldn't preclude people from doing the right thing.
Media players are only part of this equation.
Keep in mind this case is about AT activity where MS has been accused of leveraging their technologies into new markets.
Assuming MS continues it's current bundling practice. What products are content providers likely to select, especially when you factor DRM, into the picture once mediaplayer is installed on 95% of the desktop market?
The simple answer is that they will select win media server and the wmv format. While media player does, and has supported other formats it's within MS's track record to 'degrade' the experience in anything other than what they're pushing.
I'm kinda stuck for time today so I'll stop being long winded and suggest that people give some thought into whether mediaplayer domination becomes a lever for server market penetration and content control/taxation.
Hmm and Jupiter is owned by Royce Assoc which holds a 5% interest in SCO.
The plot thickens.
Another irony in this article is that the author is either unaware or overlooked the undetected internal network breach that MS incurred in, I believe, 2000. Could it be the source of the leaked code in the other article (I can't access it and haven't read the posts)? Perhaps. That breach was, by varying accounts, 9-12 weeks in duration. No small amount of time for those with ill intent. Was code tampered with? Is there even now code in there that is malicious? At the time there were a variety of accounts from different executives. They got the code, they may have, they didn't. Who knows which was true. It's a 'faith based' system in that we have to believe them with no verification. Have there been other breaches? Will we ever know? How long will they last before they're detected? " Inevitably, that choice will lead to security breaches that will cost those same governments (and ultimately you), huge amounts of money to rectify." I'll agree with him on this point but at the same time this really proves that the article is mere FUD pablum. Security breaches have cost Corporations, Governments, Individuals time and huge amounts of money for years. With windows, unix, linux, even some of the old stalwart mainframe o/s's. They will continue to do so whether due to software flaws or administrative error. Readers can decide for themselves which ones have cost more. Oh! It's A Russell Jones and not 'W'. Amusingly enough W Russell Jones is Utah securities company facing a fraud case witrh SEC..... Is it the water over there?
Now why do you presume it's kids....
I'm far from a kid and use Linux in a work environment. We also use OS/390, VMS, and yes Win9/2k/XP.
The "M$" has little to do with Linux. It has everything to do with M$ and it's defacto monopoly, it's penchant for sucking the cash cow, and showing that ogranization the respect it 'deserves'.
And when will you windoze kiddies learn it's Linux and not Lunix and that the gpl isn't viral (or we'd have windows on gpl - see MS services for Unix and in particular it's gpl components), that proprietary (and paid for!) software can be purchased for it. And that it supports most hardware. We actually did better with linux than with Win2K, driver wise, back when they were both new.
On the issue... A six monthg turnaround? You must be kidding me! It was only a week ago Bill was, falsely, claiming a one day turnaround versus weeks for Linux (typically it's less than a day).
Any windows setup, mine included, was a potential target for abuse due to this. You have to trust M$ employees not to leak it, the finding company's employees not to leak it, and the black hats community to not find it.
That is a ridiculous situation for any company to be in and it's unsatisfactory performance for any software supplier let alone one who tries to claim they're the best... M$ showed zero respect for the operations of your organization and zero respect to each and every individual customer by allowing them to face that risk without warning.
I would never trust our critical business operations to Microsoft. They have repeatedly violated that trust.
It amuses me that people think fox is fair and balanced. Perhaps they're right and I'm wrong. If you search for something along the lines of fox bht scandal right to lie you may change your mind. You should find a lawsuit the general gist of which is a couple of reporters investigated implications of using bht in the food chain. Before the report was aired monsanto, a good fox advertiser, raised objections about the report and fox ordered the reporters to modify and provide false information in their coverage. The reporters refused and were fired resulting in the dismissal lawsuit. Neither the dismissal, the lawsuit nor the health impacts are relevant. What is relevant is that the reporters were ordered to lie. Fox did not dispute this. What they did argue is that they have a right to order their reporters to lie in their news coverage and that they (fox) have a constitutional right to lie. Fair and balanced? I doubt it. I might change my mind if anyone can ever show me other major news sources that have done this and argued this 'right'. No one ever has been able to though.
I can see it now "No Mom you have to modify the registry by running regedit and changing the dword to a hex 3. Then you need to boot safe mode log in as Administrator and modify the group policies. When was the last time you ran winupdate and rebooted> What?? No NO! Argggh!....I know you can barely use your computer but just think how INsecure you are from these nasty links!"
They both stink.
" The cost of these things is therefore irrelevant to the actual OS." That's asinine. Regardless of the reason MS systems are targetted those things are a cost to any individual or oganization. And the cost which will be incurred as a result of adopting any solution are totally relevant. I'd add to the original posters list the cost of downtime as well. They are actually one of the larger single recurring costs we encounter organization wide as they impact on every pc as opposed to cad on a subset of boxes, or graphics software on another handfil, etc.
I always do it for free and I'm ok with that. Those I don't consider friends I say Geeee I don't know and point them in the right direction.
With that said though I do begin to resent those who *expect* it for free... That attitude gets under my skin and they soon lose my help.
I have one aunt who likes to sneak money into my wife's coat pocket. It never comes close to what my time is worth frankly but the thought works wonders.
"+ Realistically, the software & hardware costs aren't going to be significantly different between Windows and Linux."
Except for small business i disagree with that assumption. Once you factor in the cost of CALS and applications the cost difference can be substantial. I guess where you can buy a license for win2k server, for example, and not have to buy a boatload of cals you might have a point. And we won't get into office....
"There might be some scenarios where it makes sense, but for the most part a mainframe has pathetic price/performance"
Price/performance isn't what push people into the mainframe market so the point is moot.
I have no trouble finding cars without A/C. But I've yet to find one without a heater (and wouldn't want to).
You're issue is dealers stocking what the local market wants.
"You don't pay for Media Player, you can download it for free. you don't pay extra for IE either. They are little freebies:"
They are not free. They are in the price. Sure you can download them for free but for 7 years you have also had to pay for them with your license. There are not a lot of non windows users downloading windows software to run on nonwindows operating systems.
That is part, and only part, of what's objectionable. The consumer who doesn't want those extra is subsidizing the developement and support of those who do. And the included in the price aspect precludes real competition from anyone who needs to charge more than zero dollars to stay in business.
It's all part of the lock in and competition avoidance that we see all the time from MS.
So how great does w2k look once you buy all those CALS in order to actually connect to it?
"Email is not an assault, unless the person says they're gonna hurt you, and you have some reason to believe that they are not kidding around." Merely threatening someone is not a crime afaik. So you have the ability to vent. If however the recipient has reason to believe that you are serious and are reasonably able to carry out the threat then it becomes a crime. Besides you can vent your anger without threatening assault or violence. Venting itself is rather silly but venting by suggesting violence you have no intent on carrying out is purely juvenile. He wasn't much of a programmer either obviously, installing inappropriate apps, inability to stop pop ups (whether that was ie or open ports on his system). Maybe he can use 'a time out' to get a decent education in his supposed field.
I've been dying to find the time to reply to this topic all morning but you hit my issues right on.
You even gave me a few chuckles.... I'm glad someone else realizes how moronic those 'best viewed' notes are.....
Eye candy for the mindless.