There's no reason to bash this tool yet. It's still in beta - it's going to crash. On top of that, from what the reviews have said, it's still Giant's software with a new UI.
This existing does not mean that Spybot or Ad-Aware are going to in any way become obsolete. No one spyware removal program to date can remove **all** components of spyware on an infected machine. When we have to clean computers for work, we use both Ad-Aware and Spybot and sometimes other tools on top of that, such as CWShredder or HijackThis.
This is just _one_more_ tool to work with, and so far, it's getting pretty good reviews. I don't know about the rest of you, but I hate spyware, and even though I run Linux, I still want less spyware around, so as long as this thing removes at least SOME spyware, then great. But this doesn't mean I'm going to be uninstalling Ad-Aware from users machines because "MS to the rescue!" On the other hand, just because it's got the Microsoft seal on it, it doesn't make it inherently crap...past history notwithstanding.
The only part that I find surprising, here, is that Microsoft would bother charging for the service. Why not make it free, then turn it to a pay service when they have properly locked up your data in their servers?
Right, which is why i said we can vote with our feet and our wallets...but in this case, we're a minority, without much in the way of bargaining power, and my point is just that we ought to take it in small steps. i.e., be happy we have binary drivers first, and work with that. Then, when we gain more sway, we have the ability to "demand" something.
When you're talking about a Windows platform, you've got a HUGE bargaining chip, because 90% of your userbase boycotting you is BAD. When you're talking 2% of your userbase trying to get you to release your trade secrets as open source to make them happy, you've got NO bargaining chip, at least not yet. Note that I use Linux exclusively, and I support it wholeheartedly, I'm just realistic.
"Linux is not, it was never designed as a gaming platform and probably never will be as long as video card manufacturers refuse to open source their drivers."
While I am of the mindset that Linux could be a gaming platform should it be so desired, I have to disagree with the statement that video card manufacturers need to open-source their drivers. Instead, I feel Linux needs to start allowing binary driver distribution. While it would be really awesome if the whole world followed OSS principles and shared our values, let's be realistic. They are in this for a profit, and I for one am just grateful that NVIDIA, for example, gives me a driver at all. As long as they allow Linux distributions to distribute it, I'm happy. As with any hardware, they are perfectly entitled to say "the hell with Linux, you're a tiny minority market", which then means I won't buy from them.
Conversely, I am very happy with companies that choose to support Linux in any form, and as long as they make a real effort, (i.e., not horrible binary drivers that are useless) I applaud the choice, and I'm not going to bitch and moan that they won't open source it. Yes, we are paying for the hardware, and for it to work on our system. No, we are not paying for them to do our bidding. We can vote with our feet, and our wallets, which is our perogative as consumers. But it's not our place to demand that a vendor follow our principles because we think they should.
Bottom line is, I think Linux and OSS in general needs to lighten up on this issue and work with the manufacturers on a ground that is acceptable to them. When you're dealing with someone who has something you desire, it's usually not a good idea to be petulant and uncompromising. While this is in no way intended as a rant against the parent post, it's just an issue I think needs to be rethought for OSS et al.
Please note that the article states it was a half billion dollar upgrade to the FBI computer system in general, and that:
Science Applications has received about $170 million from the FBI for its work on the project. Sources said about $100 million of that would be essentially lost if the FBI were to scrap the software.
In other words, the article says that it was $170,000,000 put into the Virtual Case File, not $500,000,000 - not that it's much better, but let's at least be accurate while we laugh at them.
I for one want to know how the school is going to respond to this. What steps are they going to take post-incident, etc.
Hell, I don't even know how one is supposed to respond in a situation like this or what I would do, I'm just curious what the aftermath of something like this is (besides just alerting the police)
Well taken, and I don't hate you for it, I just found it amusing. I totally understand where you're coming from. I'm glad it was found by someone who at least reported it and bothered to make it public rather than just spy on lots of people for various reasons.
If I were Yahoo, I would have to say no as well. Let's look at this logistically, from the standpoint of an ISP/company.
First off, the email is private (barring illegal eavesdropping), period. Yahoo has an agreement that the information is yours and you trust them not to show it to people, regardless of who.
Second, you have no effective way to verify the identity of a family member. What is Yahoo supposed to do? They don't even necesarily know that John Smith is the owner of the account to begin with, since all they have is a web form to sign up for the service. Then, they're supposed to give access to John Smith's family? That means for every request like this, Yahoo has to verify who owned the account in the first place, verify that the person is dead, then verify the family identity. All this just to keep their promise to you that your information is yours only. Or...they can just deny the request because it's NOT their job to go around doing detective work to support a request like this.
I'm deeply sorry for anyone who has suffered a loss, and I am not unsympathetic to the family, but this is just doesn't make sense for Yahoo to comply with it.
lots of comments here are noting the hubris of these guys in asking for jobs.
I'd just like to add that not only are they criticizing the company's QA process and releasing the bug without having notified google first, as others pointed out...
They found the exploit by MISTAKE! It was a bug in their own code that caused the problem, something as stupid as a missing caret at the end of a line. So, in other words, they are looking for work looking for bugs in Google's software that they found solely because of a bug in the software they wrote.
On another note, bugs in software happen, no matter WHO you are, the trick is just to be able to fix them in a timely fashion and deal with the situation effectively. I believe that Google will do this, especially if the previous comment stating that it has been patched is true. Everyone is making too big a deal out of something that has happened to every developer on every software ever. The reason MS gets crap for it is simply because they continuously produce buggy code ridden with security issues, but deny this is the case, and often ignore security problems until they are found out by the general public.
Uh, no...I was responding to the people on slashdot, who are acting like these two articles are Judgement Day.
"Is the userbase really so insecure that one criticism like this from developers is enough to bring out back-patting posts like the parent?"
That's almost the opposite of the point I was making, thanks. I was suggesting that we ought to have a little more faith in OSS and Linux that we obviously care about, and give it a little credit. Linux will still be here after this is all over, and hopefully stronger for having responded to the criticisms in the articles by fixing the problems. Does that make more sense to you?
While it's "just another OS", it's also the one I - and many others - support, and I feel that we sbould support it by giving the developers responsible for it some faith and trust to do what's best for everyone. In this case, accepting valid criticism and solving the problems it brings up.
OK, everyone, take a deep breath, calm down, and say it with me: "Linux is not dead. This is not the death of Linux"
It's going to take more than a couple of articles to bring about the demise of Linux. There are definite reponsibilities and issues that need to be addressed in Linux, as there always will be in any project of any size. Let's all just support our OS, and make sure that we make it known that it's important to us that these issues are addressed. A few negative articles are not going to kill OSS, and Linux has a way of weathering problems. Relax, and support the developers so they can get on with fixing the problem(s).
I think it would be great to see, even if it was only a first go around. Look at what a great job Keynote does of being a simple, slick program for its intended purpose.
I'd love to see Office come from Apple, and I don't even have a Mac (at least not yet). They make good products and solid software, at least in the realm of OS X (can't speak for any other versions of the OS) and I say, why not? But I won't hold my breath over a rumor...
I suggest you look at the reality rather than the emotional response and realize that Open Source continues to grow and improve.
For example, note the following:
"Bloor Research had both operating systems (Linux and NT) running on relatively old Pentium machines. In the space of one year, Linux crashed once because of a hardware fault (disk problems), which took 4 hours to fix, giving it a measured availability of 99.95 percent. Windows NT crashed 68 times, caused by hardware problems (disk), memory (26 times), file management (8 times), and a number of odd problems (33 times). All this took 65 hours to fix"
Maybe Microsoft should put those "best programmers in the world" to work on making a stable operating system.
Maybe it's only me, but I'm pretty sure that Wikipedia is a collaborative project with goals more along the lines of "Hey Joe, what's a blog" "I dont know Frank, let's find out" type of research.
It's not, to my mind, really intended to be a legitimate source for academic research, because that's just absurd. Give credit where it is due, that this is a really neat project with lots of interesting information, some of which has more value purely as social commentary than as actual fact. You're absolutely right that it's not a useful resource for scholastic, but I think you're wrong in thinking that it was ever truly intended to 'replace' factual scientific secondary or primary research.
Agent Ransack is a free program that spanks the XP search tool, and has the functionality you want. I don't use windows anymore, but when I did, this is what I used. It also has the ability to integrate into the shell a little so it's conveniently accessible, e.g. from the "Search" start menu item.
I think that may be what you desire for a Windows search tool.
"with the exception of some designers that wanna use Dreamweaver for whatever reason"
Well, then get them crossover office from CodeWeavers. I paid the 40 bucks for it and I run Dreamweaver MX, Flash MX, Photoshop 7 and IE on Linux for the occasional time that I actually need one of the above. As far as I can tell, they run flawlessly, and faster than they ever did on Windows XP or 2000, at least for me. I've been really happy with cxoffice and it's one purchase I heartily recommend to people who are candidates for switching to Linux but need their Photoshop, Dreamweaver, or Excel.
It's helped me convert plenty of Windows users who are sick of viruses but feel lost without Microsoft Word and PowerPoint, or who complain that such and such site won't work right without IE. It also allows me to design websites and test them in IE 6.0 without needing a windows machine soiling my home.
"these machines get less than two hours on a charge. i'm sure some folks claim 4 or so hours, but that's not hours of usage. i'd like to see a laptop play 4 hours of dvd's on a single charge"
I've run a few different flavors of Linux on various laptops, and though my current laptop has very short battery life (Ni-Mh battery until I can get a new Li-on), I had a Dell Inspiron 8000 that got 3.5-4 hours of battery life out of a charge.
I don't put up with hibernate, standby, or any of that crap, I'm talking 3.5-4 hours of coding, surfing the net, and watching movies/tv shows on it. If you're wondering, this was under Mandrake 9.2 on a PIII 700mhz.
Maybe it sounds unpleasant or difficult to you, but it wouldn't be the first player without a screen on the device.
The Cowon iAudio M3 has no screen on the main device, only on a remote.
I had intended to purchase one of these until I got an iPod as a gift. Personally, I don't need to see the screen, I just need the play controls. I know this seems heretical, but in case you've forgotten, Walkmans don't have screens either, and we got along just fine with them...
If you use your MP3 player to just play music while you jog, for example, you're not going to be reading a display, you'll be pressing play and getting on the road. In addition, they may be planning (if this isn't a BS hype story) to put the screen on a remote.
I really hated Apple products, until I got my iPod. Then I started to notice that it was pretty well engineered and thought out. (Little things, like when you pull the headphones out of the jack, it pauses the music). Eventually, I started to talk to our resident Mac fanatic at work, and he kept showing me similar examples of "coolness" on his PowerBook, and eventually it added up to sell me on buying a PowerBook for my next computer purchase. I'm sure I'll have Linux on there as a dual boot, but I have to agree that without the iPod, it would have taken a lot to get me to give OS X and Apple a chance.
And all this arguing, is why this application exists in the first place. No one seems to see that it's a GOOD idea to have ONE system to manage your installations, and refine it, instead of ten systems that all work "pretty good".
You know what, Gentoo portage, BSD ports, Mandrake urpmi, and Debian apt-get are all GOOD. But they're NOT -get this- perfect. Get over it. Your distro is not perfect. As long as everyone says "Well, it's not that hard to just install from source" or "it works fine with apt-get", you will have the opposite of progress.
Personally, I think it's a better idea to select one system, whichever one is most portable, and get everyone on that one system. Then, we have a whole world of Linux developers working to make that one system as close to perfect as possible. We CAN eliminate dependency hell, installation confusion for users, and give all the options and choice you want, and we can get there a hell of a lot faster if we work together instead of bitching at each other and getting smug that apt-get doesnt have dependency hell, or gentoo is great, whatever. Isn't this whole "Open Source" thing about COMMUNITY in addition to choice? Let's get it together, kick some ass, and take names!
This isn't the best solution, nor is it intended to be. It's just a STEP, in a direction that's NOT backwards. Give them some support, the closer we get to one system, the better off we will ALL be, and the further Linux can come. Stop bickering and arguing, and start supporting. I for one love Linux and everything the community has given me, and my way of giving back is to do what's best for the entire community, not to get incensed because someone dares to insult Mandrake or Debian's system. They all have faults (yes, that means you too, Gentoo and BSD users) and instead of pretending they don't, let's get together and work to fix them. You don't have to give up choice to work together, you just have to be supportive of each other.
Ok, yes, you can find it...great...but it's not going to "kill the iPod" if it's not readily available, which was the humorous (albeit not very humorous) point I was making.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no reason to bash this tool yet. It's still in beta - it's going to crash. On top of that, from what the reviews have said, it's still Giant's software with a new UI.
This existing does not mean that Spybot or Ad-Aware are going to in any way become obsolete. No one spyware removal program to date can remove **all** components of spyware on an infected machine. When we have to clean computers for work, we use both Ad-Aware and Spybot and sometimes other tools on top of that, such as CWShredder or HijackThis.
This is just _one_more_ tool to work with, and so far, it's getting pretty good reviews. I don't know about the rest of you, but I hate spyware, and even though I run Linux, I still want less spyware around, so as long as this thing removes at least SOME spyware, then great. But this doesn't mean I'm going to be uninstalling Ad-Aware from users machines because "MS to the rescue!" On the other hand, just because it's got the Microsoft seal on it, it doesn't make it inherently crap...past history notwithstanding.
-Jay
SHHHHHHHHHHHH! They'll hear you!
-Jay
Right, which is why i said we can vote with our feet and our wallets...but in this case, we're a minority, without much in the way of bargaining power, and my point is just that we ought to take it in small steps. i.e., be happy we have binary drivers first, and work with that. Then, when we gain more sway, we have the ability to "demand" something.
When you're talking about a Windows platform, you've got a HUGE bargaining chip, because 90% of your userbase boycotting you is BAD. When you're talking 2% of your userbase trying to get you to release your trade secrets as open source to make them happy, you've got NO bargaining chip, at least not yet. Note that I use Linux exclusively, and I support it wholeheartedly, I'm just realistic.
-Jay
While I am of the mindset that Linux could be a gaming platform should it be so desired, I have to disagree with the statement that video card manufacturers need to open-source their drivers. Instead, I feel Linux needs to start allowing binary driver distribution. While it would be really awesome if the whole world followed OSS principles and shared our values, let's be realistic. They are in this for a profit, and I for one am just grateful that NVIDIA, for example, gives me a driver at all. As long as they allow Linux distributions to distribute it, I'm happy. As with any hardware, they are perfectly entitled to say "the hell with Linux, you're a tiny minority market", which then means I won't buy from them.
Conversely, I am very happy with companies that choose to support Linux in any form, and as long as they make a real effort, (i.e., not horrible binary drivers that are useless) I applaud the choice, and I'm not going to bitch and moan that they won't open source it. Yes, we are paying for the hardware, and for it to work on our system. No, we are not paying for them to do our bidding. We can vote with our feet, and our wallets, which is our perogative as consumers. But it's not our place to demand that a vendor follow our principles because we think they should.
Bottom line is, I think Linux and OSS in general needs to lighten up on this issue and work with the manufacturers on a ground that is acceptable to them. When you're dealing with someone who has something you desire, it's usually not a good idea to be petulant and uncompromising. While this is in no way intended as a rant against the parent post, it's just an issue I think needs to be rethought for OSS et al.
-Jay
Please note that the article states it was a half billion dollar upgrade to the FBI computer system in general, and that:
Science Applications has received about $170 million from the FBI for its work on the project. Sources said about $100 million of that would be essentially lost if the FBI were to scrap the software.
In other words, the article says that it was $170,000,000 put into the Virtual Case File, not $500,000,000 - not that it's much better, but let's at least be accurate while we laugh at them.
-Jay
Amen, brother.
-Jay
I for one want to know how the school is going to respond to this. What steps are they going to take post-incident, etc.
Hell, I don't even know how one is supposed to respond in a situation like this or what I would do, I'm just curious what the aftermath of something like this is (besides just alerting the police)
-Jay
Well taken, and I don't hate you for it, I just found it amusing. I totally understand where you're coming from. I'm glad it was found by someone who at least reported it and bothered to make it public rather than just spy on lots of people for various reasons.
:)
Look at the bright side, you're on slashdot
-Jay
If I were Yahoo, I would have to say no as well. Let's look at this logistically, from the standpoint of an ISP/company.
First off, the email is private (barring illegal eavesdropping), period. Yahoo has an agreement that the information is yours and you trust them not to show it to people, regardless of who.
Second, you have no effective way to verify the identity of a family member. What is Yahoo supposed to do? They don't even necesarily know that John Smith is the owner of the account to begin with, since all they have is a web form to sign up for the service. Then, they're supposed to give access to John Smith's family? That means for every request like this, Yahoo has to verify who owned the account in the first place, verify that the person is dead, then verify the family identity. All this just to keep their promise to you that your information is yours only. Or...they can just deny the request because it's NOT their job to go around doing detective work to support a request like this.
I'm deeply sorry for anyone who has suffered a loss, and I am not unsympathetic to the family, but this is just doesn't make sense for Yahoo to comply with it.
-Jay
lots of comments here are noting the hubris of these guys in asking for jobs.
I'd just like to add that not only are they criticizing the company's QA process and releasing the bug without having notified google first, as others pointed out...
They found the exploit by MISTAKE! It was a bug in their own code that caused the problem, something as stupid as a missing caret at the end of a line. So, in other words, they are looking for work looking for bugs in Google's software that they found solely because of a bug in the software they wrote.
On another note, bugs in software happen, no matter WHO you are, the trick is just to be able to fix them in a timely fashion and deal with the situation effectively. I believe that Google will do this, especially if the previous comment stating that it has been patched is true. Everyone is making too big a deal out of something that has happened to every developer on every software ever. The reason MS gets crap for it is simply because they continuously produce buggy code ridden with security issues, but deny this is the case, and often ignore security problems until they are found out by the general public.
-Jay
Uh, no...I was responding to the people on slashdot, who are acting like these two articles are Judgement Day.
"Is the userbase really so insecure that one criticism like this from developers is enough to bring out back-patting posts like the parent?"
That's almost the opposite of the point I was making, thanks. I was suggesting that we ought to have a little more faith in OSS and Linux that we obviously care about, and give it a little credit. Linux will still be here after this is all over, and hopefully stronger for having responded to the criticisms in the articles by fixing the problems. Does that make more sense to you?
While it's "just another OS", it's also the one I - and many others - support, and I feel that we sbould support it by giving the developers responsible for it some faith and trust to do what's best for everyone. In this case, accepting valid criticism and solving the problems it brings up.
-Jay
OK, everyone, take a deep breath, calm down, and say it with me: "Linux is not dead. This is not the death of Linux"
It's going to take more than a couple of articles to bring about the demise of Linux. There are definite reponsibilities and issues that need to be addressed in Linux, as there always will be in any project of any size. Let's all just support our OS, and make sure that we make it known that it's important to us that these issues are addressed. A few negative articles are not going to kill OSS, and Linux has a way of weathering problems. Relax, and support the developers so they can get on with fixing the problem(s).
-Jay
I think it would be great to see, even if it was only a first go around. Look at what a great job Keynote does of being a simple, slick program for its intended purpose.
I'd love to see Office come from Apple, and I don't even have a Mac (at least not yet). They make good products and solid software, at least in the realm of OS X (can't speak for any other versions of the OS) and I say, why not? But I won't hold my breath over a rumor...
-Jay
The words "massive troll" come to mind here.
I suggest you look at the reality rather than the emotional response and realize that Open Source continues to grow and improve.
For example, note the following:
"Bloor Research had both operating systems (Linux and NT) running on relatively old Pentium machines. In the space of one year, Linux crashed once because of a hardware fault (disk problems), which took 4 hours to fix, giving it a measured availability of 99.95 percent. Windows NT crashed 68 times, caused by hardware problems (disk), memory (26 times), file management (8 times), and a number of odd problems (33 times). All this took 65 hours to fix"
Maybe Microsoft should put those "best programmers in the world" to work on making a stable operating system.
-Jay
Maybe it's only me, but I'm pretty sure that Wikipedia is a collaborative project with goals more along the lines of "Hey Joe, what's a blog" "I dont know Frank, let's find out" type of research.
It's not, to my mind, really intended to be a legitimate source for academic research, because that's just absurd. Give credit where it is due, that this is a really neat project with lots of interesting information, some of which has more value purely as social commentary than as actual fact. You're absolutely right that it's not a useful resource for scholastic, but I think you're wrong in thinking that it was ever truly intended to 'replace' factual scientific secondary or primary research.
-Jay
Agent Ransack is a free program that spanks the XP search tool, and has the functionality you want. I don't use windows anymore, but when I did, this is what I used. It also has the ability to integrate into the shell a little so it's conveniently accessible, e.g. from the "Search" start menu item.
I think that may be what you desire for a Windows search tool.
-Jay
"Back in March, Sandy Wilson was taking care of her three grandsons when a group of men attempted to burglarize her home, pointing a gun at the kids."
Obviously, if you read it, it's clear they weren't scared by the fact that there were people in the house.
-Jay
"Back in March, Sandy Wilson was taking care of her three grandsons when a group of men attempted to burglarize her home, pointing a gun at the kids."
That's from the actual article, so obviously, if you read it, it's clear they weren't scared by the fact that there were people in the house.
-Jay
"with the exception of some designers that wanna use Dreamweaver for whatever reason"
Well, then get them crossover office from CodeWeavers. I paid the 40 bucks for it and I run Dreamweaver MX, Flash MX, Photoshop 7 and IE on Linux for the occasional time that I actually need one of the above. As far as I can tell, they run flawlessly, and faster than they ever did on Windows XP or 2000, at least for me. I've been really happy with cxoffice and it's one purchase I heartily recommend to people who are candidates for switching to Linux but need their Photoshop, Dreamweaver, or Excel.
It's helped me convert plenty of Windows users who are sick of viruses but feel lost without Microsoft Word and PowerPoint, or who complain that such and such site won't work right without IE. It also allows me to design websites and test them in IE 6.0 without needing a windows machine soiling my home.
There's more information at CodeWeavers
-Jay
"these machines get less than two hours on a charge. i'm sure some folks claim 4 or so hours, but that's not hours of usage. i'd like to see a laptop play 4 hours of dvd's on a single charge"
I've run a few different flavors of Linux on various laptops, and though my current laptop has very short battery life (Ni-Mh battery until I can get a new Li-on), I had a Dell Inspiron 8000 that got 3.5-4 hours of battery life out of a charge.
I don't put up with hibernate, standby, or any of that crap, I'm talking 3.5-4 hours of coding, surfing the net, and watching movies/tv shows on it. If you're wondering, this was under Mandrake 9.2 on a PIII 700mhz.
-Jay
Maybe it sounds unpleasant or difficult to you, but it wouldn't be the first player without a screen on the device.
The Cowon iAudio M3 has no screen on the main device, only on a remote.
I had intended to purchase one of these until I got an iPod as a gift. Personally, I don't need to see the screen, I just need the play controls. I know this seems heretical, but in case you've forgotten, Walkmans don't have screens either, and we got along just fine with them...
If you use your MP3 player to just play music while you jog, for example, you're not going to be reading a display, you'll be pressing play and getting on the road. In addition, they may be planning (if this isn't a BS hype story) to put the screen on a remote.
-Jay
In other news...water is wet, and ice is cold.
Seriously, anyone who deals with spyware on a regular basis knows this already.
-Jay
I really hated Apple products, until I got my iPod. Then I started to notice that it was pretty well engineered and thought out. (Little things, like when you pull the headphones out of the jack, it pauses the music). Eventually, I started to talk to our resident Mac fanatic at work, and he kept showing me similar examples of "coolness" on his PowerBook, and eventually it added up to sell me on buying a PowerBook for my next computer purchase. I'm sure I'll have Linux on there as a dual boot, but I have to agree that without the iPod, it would have taken a lot to get me to give OS X and Apple a chance.
-Jay
And all this arguing, is why this application exists in the first place. No one seems to see that it's a GOOD idea to have ONE system to manage your installations, and refine it, instead of ten systems that all work "pretty good".
You know what, Gentoo portage, BSD ports, Mandrake urpmi, and Debian apt-get are all GOOD. But they're NOT -get this- perfect. Get over it. Your distro is not perfect. As long as everyone says "Well, it's not that hard to just install from source" or "it works fine with apt-get", you will have the opposite of progress.
Personally, I think it's a better idea to select one system, whichever one is most portable, and get everyone on that one system. Then, we have a whole world of Linux developers working to make that one system as close to perfect as possible. We CAN eliminate dependency hell, installation confusion for users, and give all the options and choice you want, and we can get there a hell of a lot faster if we work together instead of bitching at each other and getting smug that apt-get doesnt have dependency hell, or gentoo is great, whatever. Isn't this whole "Open Source" thing about COMMUNITY in addition to choice? Let's get it together, kick some ass, and take names!
This isn't the best solution, nor is it intended to be. It's just a STEP, in a direction that's NOT backwards. Give them some support, the closer we get to one system, the better off we will ALL be, and the further Linux can come. Stop bickering and arguing, and start supporting. I for one love Linux and everything the community has given me, and my way of giving back is to do what's best for the entire community, not to get incensed because someone dares to insult Mandrake or Debian's system. They all have faults (yes, that means you too, Gentoo and BSD users) and instead of pretending they don't, let's get together and work to fix them. You don't have to give up choice to work together, you just have to be supportive of each other.
-Jay
Ok, yes, you can find it...great...but it's not going to "kill the iPod" if it's not readily available, which was the humorous (albeit not very humorous) point I was making.
-Jay