What seems to be missing is good reasons for using a VM at home. I can think of several:
1) Seems a lot easier than dual-booting (for those of us with SO's who aren't comfortable with Linux)
2) Makes a good home lab for what is rapidly becoming another standard tool of the IT trade
3) Hardware speeds are approaching the level where (except for gaming and certain compute-intensive applications) most home machines are quite powerful enough to run multiple partitions without the user even noticing a slowdown.
4) Shiney!
5) Free (as in beer)!
Feel free to add to this list - it's a long way from being complete.
Incidentally, I wonder if Windows Vista will run under VM? I'm guessing yes (as anything else would mean that Microsoft is cutting their own throat).
Then Windows 2.0 (the first version stable enough to even merit consideration by business).
Then Windows 3.0.
Then Windows for Workgroups 3.11 - which ultimately ended up becoming Windows NT. WFW was just Windows 3.0 with networking added. Windows NT was just WFW with a ton of bug fixes (and that's a lot; individual bits don't weigh much).
Those of you who think you know everything are really irritating to those of us who do.
You see, people have known for a long time that Microsoft Windows has been/is an unsecure operating system. It was initially designed for single-user multitasking on non-networked personal computers. When it's design was expanded to meet the demands of the business world (networking, multiuser, etc.), security flaws were introduced. However, since anybody capable of even minimal research would've known this, it would be inappropriate to place all of the blame on Microsoft and Bill Gates.
For what it's worth, Microsoft really is committed to correcting the security flaws in all of their products. It's economic good sense. Never mind the meme of:
1) Invent buggy operating system,
2) Wait for malware to reduce system to molten slag,
3) Sell the cure
4) Profit!!!
because that's not the reality. Microsoft is painfully aware that Linux is biting gradually into their market share primarily because of security concerns. They're not the "evil empire" most people make them out to be. Rather like the Borg, I think - they really believe that they are trying to improve the standard of living for all races, as it were. Never mind if they want it or not - freedom is irrelevant.
And, no, I'm not saying that Microsoft cares one iota about any flaws in their software; but they do care about the potential loss of business those flaws can and do cause. That's the free enterprise system in action. And FWIW, XP ain't half bad for workstations and personal computing. I wouldn't bet my servers/services on that, but as desktop OS's go (hate to say this, but) they're still leading the pack. No, I don't want to hear how your KDE/GNOME desktop lets you do everything you want, because for 90% of the computing world (number made up; anybody got a real number?), those don't let you do everything you want - hellfire, I even know people who can't adapt to GNOME/KDE for occasional computing needs, let alone day-to-day use.
Bill Gates got rich selling people what they want, pure and simple. He took advantage of the free-enterprise system, which makes him at worst detestable, at best a businessman.
then we must either accept or mitigate the unpleasant aspects of that same system.
We wouldn't have this problem under, say, socialism or communism. Even a monarchy would probably have either siezed Microsoft or broken it when its size and power became a threat to the crown.
OK? No. But inevitable. If you value your capitalist American free-enterprise lifestyle (and I do) then you shouldn't be too disappointed when that system produces firms such as Microsoft, and powerful men such as Bill Gates. You can try to fix it, but in the end you have to take the good with the bad, or else go to another system. I know which one I choose (hint: it ain't going to another system).
It took legislation and governmental action to get Carnagie to invest in improving his product quality.
Kerosene, gasoline and diesel have been used in devices which have lead to literally tens of thousands of deaths. Further, these products are dangerous if mishandled. Granted, these behaviors were predictable; nonetheless, I see (diesel fuel + fertilizer) approximately equals (M$ Windows + malware).
They practiced quality control only in the face of government force - then, they learned that this was actually good for business and incorporated quality control in their corporate mindsets. Microsoft, unfortunately, has learned the opposite lesson. Can't blame 'em for learning now, can we?
In other posts, I have found myself occasionally in disagreement with you, but more often merely unimpressed with the way you've expressed your opinion. In this instance, however, you have hit the nail squarely on the head. Until the government can find a way to tax recreational drugs effectively, they will continue to prohibit their consumption in order to generate a revenue stream.
Alcohol production requires a small measure of expertise and some small quantity of inexpensive materials. Even though these are minor impediments to distilling your own liquor, they are enough to keep the vast majority of Americans from doing so (the smell doesn't help). In the case of marihuana, however, absolutely no expertise is required - hellfire, the stuff is a weed. It's hard to keep it from growing. Thus, it was possible to begin effectively taxing virtually all alcohol production in the country (at 35-70% or even higher). If such a tax were attempted with marihuana, any clod with the common sense not to actively walk on his plants every day could circumvent paying such a tax, thus preventing any signifigant revenue stream for the government.
Unfortunately, this is not likely to change in my lifetime. Even when the popular vote is for decriminalization/legalization of marihuana, the power structure that is our government prevents it. Ever sensative to any threat to their power, they (the government and its component personnel) will react zealously, vigorously and violently to crush that threat.
I have to say "Yes" - it does make up for all the times Mr. Gates has used the American free-enterprise system exactly as intended to serve his own best interests.
You want corporate evil? Look at fellows like Carnagie and Rockefeller. There's a couple of great examples of the "robber baron", and we still name civic centers and auditoriums after them. Gates isn't even a blip on the radar next to those two. Granted, he's beyond obscenely rich, and there's no mistaking his business practices for anything resembling fair, but he really is quite tame by comparison to some of America's more revered/despised business leaders of the past.
American history is replete with such men. It's the inevitable result of the free-enterprise system.
The one rule I figured out . . . you could make the ultimate prosthetic, aid, wheelchair, etc. - but if it's ugly, nobody will use it. That's why such a large percentage of amputees usually wear a non-functional prosthetic that looks (kinda) like their missing limb; some don't even bother with the functional "claw" type attachment at all, because they'd rather look normal than have the lost functionality back.
This thing is pretty ugly looking - even Toranga Leela would sneer at it! I predict a dismal sales record for this toy.
for somebody who wonders: why do scientists always insist on technology being "reliable" before the government can use it? I ask you, where would we be if we had left science to be "certain" that the A-bomb would work back in '45? I'll tell you where . . . not here!
Pesky scientists! Won't let the government fry terrorists just because the proof isn't surefire. Imagine!
IIRC, Microsoft bought TiVO a ways back (didn't they?). A TiVO is just a linux appliance.
Come to think of it, that's probably why in the last year or so, I'm suddenly bombarded by "Press THUMBS UP! for more" during commercials (when I can't time-skip 'em), and the plethora of advertising being pushed to the messages area.
at least, that's what the current administration here in the US is saying. They will not take any action on these findings, as it is "not serious enough to warrant actions which will cost US jobs".
But I'm okay with that. Really.
With just a little luck, the other thing scientists have been saying for quite a while will happen - we'll run out of crude oil to burn. That'll at least give our planet a fighting chance at having something like an ecosystem when we're finding our next opportunity to screw the pooch.
Water hits its maximum density at 4C (39F). In fact, it's the only fluid I know of which achieves its maximum density while still a liquid (although cooled sufficiently, -60C I think, manages to exceed its density at 4C).
to the effect that software which is neither commercially available nor commercially supported gets dropped in the "public domain" bucket. The argument I recall had to do with somebody sharing Windows3.1 around the time W2K was released.
I could very well be dead wrong. Oh, well. My original assertion still stands - take advantage of SCO's offer. At worst, you've entered a lottery for a BMW. Just don't sign anything in blood . . .
Let's say you start distributing your old BeOS install disks. The company which owns the IP on BeOS can sue you, but by showing that the product is no longer commercially available, you should be able to avoid both criminal and civil penalties.
Yes, the code is out of your reach, but you can redistribute BeOS with relative impugnity.
Then again, IANAL. It's quite possible you could be sued back to the stone age.
. . . opportunity. After all, consider: once SCO finally goes bankrupt (and I have little doubt that eventually, they will) their "intellectual property" (what they retain of it) will become the property of their creditors, who will almost certainly not make it commercially available. That (IIRC) will make SCO's OS de facto public domain. Those elements of SCO's OS which are not their IP will likewise almost certainly end up as either public domain or GPL'ed.
Since there are businesses out there still using SCO's products, there will be a market for professionals specifically trained and qualified to administer those products (even if only long enough to migrate to something else).
No, I get an error message, something about "Undefined error occurred at (blah, blah, blah) . ..". I'm not too concerned about making this work, as OpenSuSE Linux 10.0 and (preinstalled) Windows XP Home Edition (dual boot) have satisfied my computing needs to date. I was only curious about the beta; but at this point, Vista doesn't offer me anything I feel like I really need. I may go back after the 32-bit deep version and see if that works, as those brief intervals I use Windows I don't yet have any real need for the benefits of a 64-bit architecture.
is that (much like terrorists) there is no formal organization against which to direct your attention. The white-hats are left with trying to find individual crackers, much like the *AA goes after individual file-sharers because there is no centralized target for their wrath.
In this instance, however, it is being hypothesized that an organized group is responsible. That's a centralized target; likely to yield more than one guy in his basement wearing shorts and a coffee-stained t-shirt, drinking coffee and jolt and living off old pizza.
So, to CERT (and their international counterparts) I say - "Go get 'em, boys!"
Slashdot Mirror
What seems to be missing is good reasons for using a VM at home. I can think of several:
1) Seems a lot easier than dual-booting (for those of us with SO's who aren't comfortable with Linux)
2) Makes a good home lab for what is rapidly becoming another standard tool of the IT trade
3) Hardware speeds are approaching the level where (except for gaming and certain compute-intensive applications) most home machines are quite powerful enough to run multiple partitions without the user even noticing a slowdown.
4) Shiney!
5) Free (as in beer)!
Feel free to add to this list - it's a long way from being complete.
Incidentally, I wonder if Windows Vista will run under VM? I'm guessing yes (as anything else would mean that Microsoft is cutting their own throat).
Then Windows 3.0.
Then Windows for Workgroups 3.11 - which ultimately ended up becoming Windows NT. WFW was just Windows 3.0 with networking added. Windows NT was just WFW with a ton of bug fixes (and that's a lot; individual bits don't weigh much).
Those of you who think you know everything are really irritating to those of us who do.
In all the history of rocketry, the successes are actually outnumbered by the failures. That's how we got this far.
Maybe someday, rocketry will be as reliable as, say, telephony or jet travel; but for now, it's an incredibly risky affair.
Somebody mod the parent up, please.
For what it's worth, Microsoft really is committed to correcting the security flaws in all of their products. It's economic good sense. Never mind the meme of:
1) Invent buggy operating system,
2) Wait for malware to reduce system to molten slag,
3) Sell the cure
4) Profit!!!
because that's not the reality. Microsoft is painfully aware that Linux is biting gradually into their market share primarily because of security concerns. They're not the "evil empire" most people make them out to be. Rather like the Borg, I think - they really believe that they are trying to improve the standard of living for all races, as it were. Never mind if they want it or not - freedom is irrelevant.
And, no, I'm not saying that Microsoft cares one iota about any flaws in their software; but they do care about the potential loss of business those flaws can and do cause. That's the free enterprise system in action. And FWIW, XP ain't half bad for workstations and personal computing. I wouldn't bet my servers/services on that, but as desktop OS's go (hate to say this, but) they're still leading the pack. No, I don't want to hear how your KDE/GNOME desktop lets you do everything you want, because for 90% of the computing world (number made up; anybody got a real number?), those don't let you do everything you want - hellfire, I even know people who can't adapt to GNOME/KDE for occasional computing needs, let alone day-to-day use.
Bill Gates got rich selling people what they want, pure and simple. He took advantage of the free-enterprise system, which makes him at worst detestable, at best a businessman.
We wouldn't have this problem under, say, socialism or communism. Even a monarchy would probably have either siezed Microsoft or broken it when its size and power became a threat to the crown.
OK? No. But inevitable. If you value your capitalist American free-enterprise lifestyle (and I do) then you shouldn't be too disappointed when that system produces firms such as Microsoft, and powerful men such as Bill Gates. You can try to fix it, but in the end you have to take the good with the bad, or else go to another system. I know which one I choose (hint: it ain't going to another system).
Kerosene, gasoline and diesel have been used in devices which have lead to literally tens of thousands of deaths. Further, these products are dangerous if mishandled. Granted, these behaviors were predictable; nonetheless, I see (diesel fuel + fertilizer) approximately equals (M$ Windows + malware).
They practiced quality control only in the face of government force - then, they learned that this was actually good for business and incorporated quality control in their corporate mindsets. Microsoft, unfortunately, has learned the opposite lesson. Can't blame 'em for learning now, can we?
Alcohol production requires a small measure of expertise and some small quantity of inexpensive materials. Even though these are minor impediments to distilling your own liquor, they are enough to keep the vast majority of Americans from doing so (the smell doesn't help). In the case of marihuana, however, absolutely no expertise is required - hellfire, the stuff is a weed. It's hard to keep it from growing. Thus, it was possible to begin effectively taxing virtually all alcohol production in the country (at 35-70% or even higher). If such a tax were attempted with marihuana, any clod with the common sense not to actively walk on his plants every day could circumvent paying such a tax, thus preventing any signifigant revenue stream for the government.
Unfortunately, this is not likely to change in my lifetime. Even when the popular vote is for decriminalization/legalization of marihuana, the power structure that is our government prevents it. Ever sensative to any threat to their power, they (the government and its component personnel) will react zealously, vigorously and violently to crush that threat.
You want corporate evil? Look at fellows like Carnagie and Rockefeller. There's a couple of great examples of the "robber baron", and we still name civic centers and auditoriums after them. Gates isn't even a blip on the radar next to those two. Granted, he's beyond obscenely rich, and there's no mistaking his business practices for anything resembling fair, but he really is quite tame by comparison to some of America's more revered/despised business leaders of the past.
American history is replete with such men. It's the inevitable result of the free-enterprise system.
I would've posted this sooner, but the server is too slow . . . ;^D
This thing is pretty ugly looking - even Toranga Leela would sneer at it! I predict a dismal sales record for this toy.
Pesky scientists! Won't let the government fry terrorists just because the proof isn't surefire. Imagine!
In that corner - advocates of Ruby (I haven't got a clue on this one, folks)
And in this corner - dinosaurs like myself who still think awk/sed/sh is a pretty neat thing. Wait a minute, that's three corners. Uh . . .
You're right - I misremembered this.
Come to think of it, that's probably why in the last year or so, I'm suddenly bombarded by "Press THUMBS UP! for more" during commercials (when I can't time-skip 'em), and the plethora of advertising being pushed to the messages area.
But I'm okay with that. Really.
With just a little luck, the other thing scientists have been saying for quite a while will happen - we'll run out of crude oil to burn. That'll at least give our planet a fighting chance at having something like an ecosystem when we're finding our next opportunity to screw the pooch.
Water hits its maximum density at 4C (39F). In fact, it's the only fluid I know of which achieves its maximum density while still a liquid (although cooled sufficiently, -60C I think, manages to exceed its density at 4C).
I could very well be dead wrong. Oh, well. My original assertion still stands - take advantage of SCO's offer. At worst, you've entered a lottery for a BMW. Just don't sign anything in blood . . .
Let's say you start distributing your old BeOS install disks. The company which owns the IP on BeOS can sue you, but by showing that the product is no longer commercially available, you should be able to avoid both criminal and civil penalties.
Yes, the code is out of your reach, but you can redistribute BeOS with relative impugnity.
Then again, IANAL. It's quite possible you could be sued back to the stone age.
Since there are businesses out there still using SCO's products, there will be a market for professionals specifically trained and qualified to administer those products (even if only long enough to migrate to something else).
No, I get an error message, something about "Undefined error occurred at (blah, blah, blah) . . .". I'm not too concerned about making this work, as OpenSuSE Linux 10.0 and (preinstalled) Windows XP Home Edition (dual boot) have satisfied my computing needs to date. I was only curious about the beta; but at this point, Vista doesn't offer me anything I feel like I really need. I may go back after the 32-bit deep version and see if that works, as those brief intervals I use Windows I don't yet have any real need for the benefits of a 64-bit architecture.
the authors of Gnutella/eMule/bitTorrent software . . . after all, it gives you access to where all of that illegal content is, right?
Another quality Microsoft product!
Uh, you'd better read up on what "PVP" and "DVI-D" actually mean. Remember: DRM manages rights the same way prison manages freedom.
In this instance, however, it is being hypothesized that an organized group is responsible. That's a centralized target; likely to yield more than one guy in his basement wearing shorts and a coffee-stained t-shirt, drinking coffee and jolt and living off old pizza.
So, to CERT (and their international counterparts) I say - "Go get 'em, boys!"
WTF???