Obviously you've never even used a non-Windows system.
Wow, you've got me all figured out.
Show me ONE email application for Linux
I don't have to. Please go look on Wikipedia and come back after you've figured out the infection vector for the most endemic and fastest-spreading Windows worms in history and then we'll talk. Actually, I'll save you the trouble - it's user-executed attachments. In some cases, attachments inside ZIP files. Some of them with passwords.
because of people clicking on things and automatically installing and running them
So if I send you a TAR file with a Python script with the exec bit set and instructions in really broken english as to how to run it, you won't do it? Probably not because you're '1337' and run "non-Windows systems", but the people whose boxes are 0wned by malware will. Right after they download and run that REALLY COOL SCREENSAVER after clicking on the warning that they shouldn't, and right after that they'll open and run the REALLY FUNNY JOKE they got from 'osaoid90lsad@sdjunjasuj.net'. And just for shits and giggles they'll click 'Yes' on that ActiveX warning dialog because, well, they just had to look at that REALLY COOL WEBPAGE someone told them about.
Since the vast majority of Windows mal/crap/zombie|ware infections are caused by user intervention your theory of the quality of code being a factor in malicious code taking over a machine is more than a little dumb. If you let the user do anything on a computer, they will make sure they do the worst possible things to it. It's going to be more difficult on OS X and Linux, but it won't be impossible. Or do you think Joe "hey this attachment looks cool, I'll open it" Blow's IQ is going to suddenly shoot up to 180 the moment they install Ubuntu?
Windows has more vectors, sure. OSX has more safeguards, sure. But if it's the same users, the eventual result is also the same. Unless you know of a way to allow people to use their computers without actuall interacting with them.
Yeah Apple blames MS, it's their competitor, I don't think anyone else would expect differently
I'm sorry, I feel like that Dilbert strip where the apathy fairy runs into Wally and is shocked that he's not just a legend they teach at Apathy Fairy School. You must be that quintessential apple fanboy I keep hearing about but never really ran into fully until now. Please elaborate as to what you mean by "anyone would expect differently" here - I would expect Apple to apologize and maybe recall instead of taking an infantile potshot at Microsoft. Correct?
And in truth Apple should have made sure their windows production machines were not infected.
No shit?
Apple could just as easily turned around and said
Please tell me this whole post is actually a joke. Please.
Debian is attempting to take legal responsibility for the software. Yet the software provider (Mozilla) is already handling that responsibiity
There is no "legal responsibility" here. Mozilla is trying to protect a trademark, and by extension, a brand. The brand and the recognition it carries is worth much more than any of their products - even more so because in this case the software is not sold. Debian has its inflexible Covenant of Freeness that considers any type of compromise to be a death sentence.
The licenses under which these two "things" are released explicitly state that the originator has no liability, just like - wait for it - commercial licenses. There is no "legal" issue here other than Mozilla's desire to make a buck and that desire crashing with Debian's apparent zeal in preventing everyone from making one as well.
I might be mistaken here but the whole stupid "Iceweasel" thing is exclusive to Debian. The author's contention that this will "hurt" adoption of "open source" because choice is confusing to end users might by correct in some instances but would a Windows version of Iceweasel ever see the light of day? I don't think the Debian "you're not free enough for us" hacks will also create a "more free" port of Iceweasel that runs on Windows. I can't see that happening.
No, the problem will be relegated to people who use Linux, and more specifically, Debian and derivatives (I guess). Issues with extensions and themes not working for whatever reasons and so on are possible, I suppose, but people who use Firefox on other platforms wouldn't even see Iceweasel at all.
That's disingenuous at best. You and everyone else in the world knows damn well why they blocked "allah". When some yahoo (no pun intended) creates a screen name called "jesuslikesgoats86" the worst that will happen is that some people will be amused and some annoyed. When someone creates a "allahlikesgoats33" account the worst that can happen is some sucktard will send a bomb letter to a Yahoo executive.
This whole PC thing is stupid - I don't remember seeing riots and deaths lately in the West as a result of a newspaper publishing some lame cartoons. We all know what happens, where, why and who is responsible. Allow enough people to create lamer Yahoo screen names with the word "allah" in them and you might very well be looking at actual violence somehwere.
So I don't blame them from doing that at all. I think it's insane and ridiculous, but I simply cannot fault them.
Having an alternative point of view is not zealotry and anybody who thinks it is is well on the way to being a zealot themselves.
Failing to tirelessly characterize Microsoft (or "M$") as the spawn of Satan is not "astroturfing" and anybody who goes around claiming otherwise is well overdue for their zealot honor badge.
I just pictured 'bit01' here, canuck57 and twitter getting together for a paranoid zealot party, complete with a fun contest to see who can figure out the best way to pronounce "M$" so it can be used in casual conversation.
Shweet, I can almost sense all the upcoming Slashdot articles about MySpace that include the term "beleaguered". Just one question though - is there such a thing as a MySpace "fanboy"? If so I'm going to have to upgrade the asbestos suit I used for the Apple ones.
Hey! That might be a leak of the original SimLife for Windows, circa 1998 or so. When mating, the animals would go "OH LA LA!!", and so you'd know you had a new little transmogrified Chickadillo or an Armacken ready to be put to work consuming resources. That Mammal::orgasm() call looks like just the thing =)
You're comparing apples to oranges here. The vast majority of companies that use VS.NET do so through an MSDN susbcription, which entitles you to between 4 and 10 free support incidents. And this is tier-three support, often with the people who work on the product. I am assuming that you refer to "support" for development products/servers rather than Visual Studio itself, which rarely (if ever) is a support issue (unless you count not knowing what to do with it, but that's training).
I've used MSDN managed support incidents at least three times in the past seven years with server products, and I've solved my problems every time. On one occasion in 2004 I spent almost eight hours on the phone with one of the people in the Content Management Server testing team working through an issue that ended up having been caused by one of our developers. Didn't cost me a dime (well, of course we paid for the MSDN subscription).
As for Windows itself, at the enterprise level the support is normally required for servers, not desktops. I've never worked for a small company that uses Microsoft products so I don't really know how things work there. If it's anything like the enterprise I'd say once you pick up that phone you're desperate enough that $300 or whatever you end up paying is really peanuts. The premium support contracts with Microsoft (normally through regional offices) are worth their weight in gold and they're really not that expensive considering what you get. This might very well be the case with some FLOSS products of course, but I'm not familiar with that beyond the example I mentioned.
If you have hundreds of thousands of customers, you can afford to spread the load between them. When you only have a few thousands, you need more money per customer to support the same level of development.
Which would mean that all software begins life as insanely expensive and then comes down in price? My experience sez that's not the case.
Quality and reliability
Yeah, I've never had to track down stupid issues in open source software. Never!
Support
Since the common wisdom seems to be that Microsoft charges a lot of money for nothing and it's super-easy to replace "propietary" software with FLOSS equivalents (MySQL vs. Oracle, GiMP vs. Photoshop, etc) I'd say that's about the only thing you could conceivably be charging for, other than packaging and/or integration. So I suppose the issue here is really "why are support contracts so expensive?" rather than "why is the software so expensive?".
Either way, my (relatively limited) experience with FLOSS vendors is that they tend to be a bit arrogant in the sense that they'll tell you that whatever you're using right now is "shit" and they have the solution to all of mankind's problems (including yours), and then they have absolutely no idea how to create things like tiered pricings and segment/volume discounts for different types of customers. That's something commercial software vendors do very well. The commercial ones will also tell you that they'll get you off the "shit", but then they can walk the walk. FLOSS vendors seem to be all talk.
In our case we ended up going without a support contract (insanely expensive) and hired a guy that was an expert with the software. He did all the customization work we needed for about a year and he made a good $50K with virtually guaranteed future contract work. The "vendor" (if one can call them that) ended up losing out to the hacker kid in mom's basement - literally.
I've noticed that you haven't addressed any of the points in the previous post by twitter
I've noticed that trying to do so is useless - questioning anything he says is an "insult" and automatically categorizes me as a "troll" and "astroturfer". You haven't noticed this, I take it? Instead I asked him to clarify why he was trying to tie in whatever misdeeds he accuses Microsoft of doing to his own alleged "plight".
What do you have to say in relation to the Barkto incident
I'd say twitter has come up with some new links (the Bartko thing happened in 1994, surely if that's a pattern he can get better proof?), but overall I have no problem with criticizing Microsoft as you seem to be implying. I would have gone mad a long time ago hanging around here. There are lots of things to criticize them about, but "OMFG M$ Windoze crashes every FIVE minutes LOLOLOLOL!!!1" for example is not one of them. If you're going to do it, at least do it intelligently.
FUD, misinformation and hysterical rants are another thing.
Now, what do you think about twitter's "help help I'm being opressed" whining? I noticed you didn't address my points either.
I don't have any "sockpuppet accounts", unlike you. When I reply to you, I do it logged in and under the only Slashdot account I have. Having said that, posting links to my replies to you is hardly "proof" that I'm a "troll" as you claim - it merely shows that I reply to you. Now, please point out a single one of my posts that is specifically "trolling" you, as opposed to simply pointing out your deliberate inaccuracies and FUD and asking you to clarify what you write. If I wanted to troll you I'd do it as an AC and I would do what all your AC friends like to do, which is post things like these.
So again, instead of insulting my intelligence perhaps you would like to address my questions: Why do you post the same thingtwice when you've already been modded down as troll? Why do you insist that those of us who reply to you are "M$ PR astroturfers"? Is that your security blanket? Do you think posting things like these causes you to be "unfairly targeted"? And that's just the start. If you want to keep claiming people are "trolls" then we can always talk about all these as well. Remember - you started all this.
Instead, why don't you grow up and start contributing to the discussions that take place here. Your infantile "zOMFG M$ IS TEH sUxx0rz LOLOLOLOL!!!" disguised with that "let me tell you how it is" tone of yours is annoying and benefits no one.
You know, I just realized I sort of implied that you were "insulting" your friends or something - sorry. I'm sure that's not the case =)
It all comes down to using the right tools for the job. For a while now Firefox has been the right tool for browsing the web on Windows, in my opinion. Maybe that will change later when IE7 is released. Who knows.
To anyone who is "pro-IE", I always show them Firefox with AdBlock. That gets them every time.
IE can be used safely if it is patched and you don't have the habit of visiting random websites (most people visit only a handful of sites anyway), but FF+AdBlock simply trumps everything else. I know about Proxomitron and all the other solutions for IE, but they simply can't come close to AdBlock.
Paired with a few other must-have extensions like TabMix Plus and CustomizeGoogle, I will happily live with Firefox enormous memory bloat.
Insulting people and telling them that their choice in software is crap accomplishes nothing. Show them the alternatives and you'll make a difference.
Today I use IE primarily for the occasional Flash-heavy site I have to visit, or for things like OWA. Other than that it mostly goes unused.
To anyone actually thinking of actually modding twitter up, please be aware that he's attempting to equate whatever Microsoft (or "M$") does to the fact that he is constantly modded down because of his troll posts. Simply look at his current posting history. It's interesting that he links to the message where he "outs" KeithRussel as a "troll", this is the entire thread which should be considered for context. This is yet another thread where twitter probably thinks he is being "trolled" and "harassed". The simple reality that emerges after looking at those threads is apparent.
twitter fails to understand that this is a public forum, and expressing one's opinions will eventually result in one's opinions being questioned in one way or another. Most of the people who "troll" twitter are simply requesting that he qualify his remarks, which more often than not are simply hysterical FUD and misguided attempts at "evangelism", which in his head are somehow good for the free software community.
twitter acuses anyone who does not toe his line of being "M$ PR astroturfers", tries to spread outrageous FUD left and right and then links to things that happened seven years ago to try to prove that Microsoft is out to get him. This kind of behavior should not be rewarded.
Nowhere in your attempt to compare an account with 1,200+ comments that has existed for more than three years with two accounts that have a grand total of 8 posts between them did I see an explanation for your posting of the same comment twice in a row.
Would you like to try again, or are you just going to go on pretending that you're being unfairly targeted by a vast conspiracy of "Windoze" zombie botnets with mod points? I mean, instead of jut accepting that if you're being modded down as troll then you probably are doing something wrong.
Maybe - and this is just a theory - your pointless "M$ Winblowze is teh lolololol suxxorz x100000000000!!!1!!!" prose is simply not welcome here anymore. I'll let you munch on that for a while.
Microsoft's Shared source initiative is not free software.
Interesting. So what you're saying here is that it would only be useful if it were under the GPL? Really?
First, you don't have all of the source, so the Trojan is still hidden.
You do have all of the source. What makes you think you don't? And what "trojan"? Are you implying that "M$" is inserting trojans into the software? Please, elaborate.
Second, you can't modify it and share your changes.
No, it's a comercially-licensed code sharing agreement, identical to the ones you can set up with IBM and Oracle and everyone else. Again, if it's not GPL then it must be useless, correct? Well that's a nice opinion, but an opinion nonetheless.
The "customizations" they are so proud of, therefore, are no better for security than changing the wallpaper on your desktop.
And your "arguments" are no better than FUD.
BTW, for the record, I think it's a bad idea to use any sort of commercial software in these things - but I also think it's utterly useless to make the argument that only GPL software will do for the purpose. The government should control this software without any sort of vendor control and they should treat it just like defense software, with outside auditors to provide independent validation.
Think about this - you can now integrate a full-blown email client into your application (CMS, corporate, portals, etc) by simply writing around what will probably be a thin WS/RPC wrapper. Branding can't be far behind, and Yahoo will probably use the insertion of (hopefully) unobtrusive ads to finance it. Higher-level customers can probably do much more, including getting rid of ads. Maybe the service will even work with other domains. Now John Coder can offer a real email client in his app with minimal effort.
It remains to be seen if they can pull this off, but it's nice to see this type of innovation and broad steps coming from somewhere other than Google. I like Google, but they need the competition or they'll start to stagnate. Competition is good!
Your UID is in the 100K's and your first post was probably around early 2000. You've posted 5,769 times. Assuming a start date of 2001 and six years to date, that's just under three times a day you've shared your insulting "M$ is tah suxx" bullshit with generous loads of retarded conspiracy theories, FUD-laden claims, hilariously petulant demeanor and preschool-level spelling.
Now, KeithRussel has a UID under 5K, and his first post was probably in early '99 or so. He's posted just over 1,000 comments. Assuming 7 years to date that's just under one post every four days, on average.
If you're not too fucking cheap, splurge $5 bucks on the website that seems to be the center of your sad life to go through Keith's posting history. If your "theory" of that account having been purchased somehow is correct, that means that his posting pattern must have changed at some point. It doesn't. But you can figure that out for yourself if you're interested. So since his first reply to you appears just a few months ago, that means that someone was mental enough to "buy" this account and keep it dormant until 90 days ago just for the purpose of giving you a hard time. Is that what you're implying? OK then, prove it.
Prove it. Or, go ahead and prove that something I pointed out above is wrong. I dare you. Maybe this time instead of just slithering away or using that infantile "I'm laughing at you" smegma you'll develop some balls? It's already bad enough that you refer to yourself in the third person. What the hell is wrong with you? You must be a Microsoft-sponsored troll in Indonesia designed specifically to make the free software community look stupid. There's no other possible explanation. There's no way in hell that a person so utterly screwed up exists anywhere except in the mind of some evil PR astroturfer expert.
And finally, to your "whenever I see more of your insults and bullshit" point, how about I post this every time I see your "insults and bullshit", eh? Oh, wait. Someone already does, every time. Funny how that works. But hey, I can always help if needed.
And yet interestingly, by simply looking at your current posting history you're the one who is modded overrated, troll and flamebait - mods that KeithRussel does not have. How can that be, twitter? Oh, I forget - it's probably because of the "vast M$ conspiracy" that targets you by using Slashdot mod points, right? And the point of this "conspiracy" is to "astroturf" Slashdot and promote "M$ winblows". Correct?
For example, is the "conspiracy" responsible for the moderation on fantastic post of yours? Or did you just sort of forget that anyone can look at your posting history?
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, you've got me all figured out.
I don't have to. Please go look on Wikipedia and come back after you've figured out the infection vector for the most endemic and fastest-spreading Windows worms in history and then we'll talk. Actually, I'll save you the trouble - it's user-executed attachments. In some cases, attachments inside ZIP files. Some of them with passwords.
So if I send you a TAR file with a Python script with the exec bit set and instructions in really broken english as to how to run it, you won't do it? Probably not because you're '1337' and run "non-Windows systems", but the people whose boxes are 0wned by malware will. Right after they download and run that REALLY COOL SCREENSAVER after clicking on the warning that they shouldn't, and right after that they'll open and run the REALLY FUNNY JOKE they got from 'osaoid90lsad@sdjunjasuj.net'. And just for shits and giggles they'll click 'Yes' on that ActiveX warning dialog because, well, they just had to look at that REALLY COOL WEBPAGE someone told them about.
"I'm sorry I ran into that guy back there officer, but this car is brain dead. Can you believe it? Wow. Can I go now?"
Windows has more vectors, sure. OSX has more safeguards, sure. But if it's the same users, the eventual result is also the same. Unless you know of a way to allow people to use their computers without actuall interacting with them.
Yeah... and?
I'm sorry, I feel like that Dilbert strip where the apathy fairy runs into Wally and is shocked that he's not just a legend they teach at Apathy Fairy School. You must be that quintessential apple fanboy I keep hearing about but never really ran into fully until now. Please elaborate as to what you mean by "anyone would expect differently" here - I would expect Apple to apologize and maybe recall instead of taking an infantile potshot at Microsoft. Correct?
No shit?
Please tell me this whole post is actually a joke. Please.
There is no "legal responsibility" here. Mozilla is trying to protect a trademark, and by extension, a brand. The brand and the recognition it carries is worth much more than any of their products - even more so because in this case the software is not sold. Debian has its inflexible Covenant of Freeness that considers any type of compromise to be a death sentence.
The licenses under which these two "things" are released explicitly state that the originator has no liability, just like - wait for it - commercial licenses. There is no "legal" issue here other than Mozilla's desire to make a buck and that desire crashing with Debian's apparent zeal in preventing everyone from making one as well.
No, the problem will be relegated to people who use Linux, and more specifically, Debian and derivatives (I guess). Issues with extensions and themes not working for whatever reasons and so on are possible, I suppose, but people who use Firefox on other platforms wouldn't even see Iceweasel at all.
That's disingenuous at best. You and everyone else in the world knows damn well why they blocked "allah". When some yahoo (no pun intended) creates a screen name called "jesuslikesgoats86" the worst that will happen is that some people will be amused and some annoyed. When someone creates a "allahlikesgoats33" account the worst that can happen is some sucktard will send a bomb letter to a Yahoo executive.
This whole PC thing is stupid - I don't remember seeing riots and deaths lately in the West as a result of a newspaper publishing some lame cartoons. We all know what happens, where, why and who is responsible. Allow enough people to create lamer Yahoo screen names with the word "allah" in them and you might very well be looking at actual violence somehwere.
So I don't blame them from doing that at all. I think it's insane and ridiculous, but I simply cannot fault them.
Failing to tirelessly characterize Microsoft (or "M$") as the spawn of Satan is not "astroturfing" and anybody who goes around claiming otherwise is well overdue for their zealot honor badge.
Sometimes I wonder where these people come from.
Shweet, I can almost sense all the upcoming Slashdot articles about MySpace that include the term "beleaguered". Just one question though - is there such a thing as a MySpace "fanboy"? If so I'm going to have to upgrade the asbestos suit I used for the Apple ones.
Some funny stuff there.
Hey! That might be a leak of the original SimLife for Windows, circa 1998 or so. When mating, the animals would go "OH LA LA!!", and so you'd know you had a new little transmogrified Chickadillo or an Armacken ready to be put to work consuming resources. That Mammal::orgasm() call looks like just the thing =)
I've used MSDN managed support incidents at least three times in the past seven years with server products, and I've solved my problems every time. On one occasion in 2004 I spent almost eight hours on the phone with one of the people in the Content Management Server testing team working through an issue that ended up having been caused by one of our developers. Didn't cost me a dime (well, of course we paid for the MSDN subscription).
As for Windows itself, at the enterprise level the support is normally required for servers, not desktops. I've never worked for a small company that uses Microsoft products so I don't really know how things work there. If it's anything like the enterprise I'd say once you pick up that phone you're desperate enough that $300 or whatever you end up paying is really peanuts. The premium support contracts with Microsoft (normally through regional offices) are worth their weight in gold and they're really not that expensive considering what you get. This might very well be the case with some FLOSS products of course, but I'm not familiar with that beyond the example I mentioned.
Which would mean that all software begins life as insanely expensive and then comes down in price? My experience sez that's not the case.
Quality and reliability
Yeah, I've never had to track down stupid issues in open source software. Never!
Support
Since the common wisdom seems to be that Microsoft charges a lot of money for nothing and it's super-easy to replace "propietary" software with FLOSS equivalents (MySQL vs. Oracle, GiMP vs. Photoshop, etc) I'd say that's about the only thing you could conceivably be charging for, other than packaging and/or integration. So I suppose the issue here is really "why are support contracts so expensive?" rather than "why is the software so expensive?".
Either way, my (relatively limited) experience with FLOSS vendors is that they tend to be a bit arrogant in the sense that they'll tell you that whatever you're using right now is "shit" and they have the solution to all of mankind's problems (including yours), and then they have absolutely no idea how to create things like tiered pricings and segment/volume discounts for different types of customers. That's something commercial software vendors do very well. The commercial ones will also tell you that they'll get you off the "shit", but then they can walk the walk. FLOSS vendors seem to be all talk.
In our case we ended up going without a support contract (insanely expensive) and hired a guy that was an expert with the software. He did all the customization work we needed for about a year and he made a good $50K with virtually guaranteed future contract work. The "vendor" (if one can call them that) ended up losing out to the hacker kid in mom's basement - literally.
I've noticed that trying to do so is useless - questioning anything he says is an "insult" and automatically categorizes me as a "troll" and "astroturfer". You haven't noticed this, I take it? Instead I asked him to clarify why he was trying to tie in whatever misdeeds he accuses Microsoft of doing to his own alleged "plight".
What do you have to say in relation to the Barkto incident
I'd say twitter has come up with some new links (the Bartko thing happened in 1994, surely if that's a pattern he can get better proof?), but overall I have no problem with criticizing Microsoft as you seem to be implying. I would have gone mad a long time ago hanging around here. There are lots of things to criticize them about, but "OMFG M$ Windoze crashes every FIVE minutes LOLOLOLOL!!!1" for example is not one of them. If you're going to do it, at least do it intelligently.
FUD, misinformation and hysterical rants are another thing.
Now, what do you think about twitter's "help help I'm being opressed" whining? I noticed you didn't address my points either.
So again, instead of insulting my intelligence perhaps you would like to address my questions: Why do you post the same thing twice when you've already been modded down as troll? Why do you insist that those of us who reply to you are "M$ PR astroturfers"? Is that your security blanket? Do you think posting things like these causes you to be "unfairly targeted"? And that's just the start. If you want to keep claiming people are "trolls" then we can always talk about all these as well. Remember - you started all this.
Instead, why don't you grow up and start contributing to the discussions that take place here. Your infantile "zOMFG M$ IS TEH sUxx0rz LOLOLOLOL!!!" disguised with that "let me tell you how it is" tone of yours is annoying and benefits no one.
It all comes down to using the right tools for the job. For a while now Firefox has been the right tool for browsing the web on Windows, in my opinion. Maybe that will change later when IE7 is released. Who knows.
IE can be used safely if it is patched and you don't have the habit of visiting random websites (most people visit only a handful of sites anyway), but FF+AdBlock simply trumps everything else. I know about Proxomitron and all the other solutions for IE, but they simply can't come close to AdBlock.
Paired with a few other must-have extensions like TabMix Plus and CustomizeGoogle, I will happily live with Firefox enormous memory bloat.
Insulting people and telling them that their choice in software is crap accomplishes nothing. Show them the alternatives and you'll make a difference.
Today I use IE primarily for the occasional Flash-heavy site I have to visit, or for things like OWA. Other than that it mostly goes unused.
twitter fails to understand that this is a public forum, and expressing one's opinions will eventually result in one's opinions being questioned in one way or another. Most of the people who "troll" twitter are simply requesting that he qualify his remarks, which more often than not are simply hysterical FUD and misguided attempts at "evangelism", which in his head are somehow good for the free software community.
twitter acuses anyone who does not toe his line of being "M$ PR astroturfers", tries to spread outrageous FUD left and right and then links to things that happened seven years ago to try to prove that Microsoft is out to get him. This kind of behavior should not be rewarded.
Would you like to try again, or are you just going to go on pretending that you're being unfairly targeted by a vast conspiracy of "Windoze" zombie botnets with mod points? I mean, instead of jut accepting that if you're being modded down as troll then you probably are doing something wrong.
Maybe - and this is just a theory - your pointless "M$ Winblowze is teh lolololol suxxorz x100000000000!!!1!!!" prose is simply not welcome here anymore. I'll let you munch on that for a while.
Interesting. So what you're saying here is that it would only be useful if it were under the GPL? Really?
You do have all of the source. What makes you think you don't? And what "trojan"? Are you implying that "M$" is inserting trojans into the software? Please, elaborate.
No, it's a comercially-licensed code sharing agreement, identical to the ones you can set up with IBM and Oracle and everyone else. Again, if it's not GPL then it must be useless, correct? Well that's a nice opinion, but an opinion nonetheless.
And your "arguments" are no better than FUD.
BTW, for the record, I think it's a bad idea to use any sort of commercial software in these things - but I also think it's utterly useless to make the argument that only GPL software will do for the purpose. The government should control this software without any sort of vendor control and they should treat it just like defense software, with outside auditors to provide independent validation.
Why are you posting the same thing again? Because you were modded down to -1 as troll?
It remains to be seen if they can pull this off, but it's nice to see this type of innovation and broad steps coming from somewhere other than Google. I like Google, but they need the competition or they'll start to stagnate. Competition is good!
Now, KeithRussel has a UID under 5K, and his first post was probably in early '99 or so. He's posted just over 1,000 comments. Assuming 7 years to date that's just under one post every four days, on average.
If you're not too fucking cheap, splurge $5 bucks on the website that seems to be the center of your sad life to go through Keith's posting history. If your "theory" of that account having been purchased somehow is correct, that means that his posting pattern must have changed at some point. It doesn't. But you can figure that out for yourself if you're interested. So since his first reply to you appears just a few months ago, that means that someone was mental enough to "buy" this account and keep it dormant until 90 days ago just for the purpose of giving you a hard time. Is that what you're implying? OK then, prove it.
Prove it. Or, go ahead and prove that something I pointed out above is wrong. I dare you. Maybe this time instead of just slithering away or using that infantile "I'm laughing at you" smegma you'll develop some balls? It's already bad enough that you refer to yourself in the third person. What the hell is wrong with you? You must be a Microsoft-sponsored troll in Indonesia designed specifically to make the free software community look stupid. There's no other possible explanation. There's no way in hell that a person so utterly screwed up exists anywhere except in the mind of some evil PR astroturfer expert.
And finally, to your "whenever I see more of your insults and bullshit" point, how about I post this every time I see your "insults and bullshit", eh? Oh, wait. Someone already does, every time. Funny how that works. But hey, I can always help if needed.
For example, is the "conspiracy" responsible for the moderation on fantastic post of yours? Or did you just sort of forget that anyone can look at your posting history?