It all sounds fine, all except for a subtle detail: you're making up everything you just said. The article didn't mention anything about cops or half the bullshit you just wrote.
Stick to the fucking article, stick to the fucking article!
Why is this Microsoft fault or problem for that matter? They made up their minds on something, whether its good or bad, that's really beyond this discussion. Chip makers have to adjust to that decision, and so happens that Intel isn't quite prepared for that kind of strategy. It seems that the only company in trouble here is Intel.
Yes at all. It's pretty much the same effort US government is doing in making sure everyone completes the transition to digital TV.
They're not promoting X brand of digital TV converters or XY cable TV company or XYZ satellite TV company. It's the same thing really, and you're taking it out of context.
I agree that promoting ONLY the use of an anti-malware software as a solution to security problems is not the way to go. However, promoting the best practices of computer security (which includes having an up-to-date AntiVirus) would be a good way to start.
We could argue about how secure is Linux or any other operating system in the hands of a security unaware individual. But that's not the point, because last I heard more than 80% of the world computers run on Windows and their operators are not experts or have any sense of security.
Usually Linux users are more technical people (even home users) and usually posses knowledge and common sense regarding security. I don't think they would be the scope of this idea, rather the other 99 percent of the users that don't have a clue.
Seems like you're taking (greatly) out of context the idea.
I don't think any money should go to advertise software companies, rather than to promote good computing practices. If you think it's a waste of money, you should think a bit more about the amount of money that flows through the Internet.
As our lives become more and more connected, I see this as a requirement. More and more people everyday start making money transfers, purchases, and basically any transaction that they would otherwise do physically over the Internet, yet, they do it so carelessly without even knowing the risks and consequences of their careless actions.
It wouldn't hurt to just let them know and inform them. After all people even pay taxes over the Internet, I think this should concern the government a bit too, wouldn't you agree?
I think it's a bit irrational to only blame the OS vendors.
Although I, of course agree that software companies should build secure software from the get-go you also have to understand that much of the blame also goes to the user. They shouldn't be opening (or clicking for that matter) ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that passes through their mailbox or instant messenger.
And I believe that to prevent bad or unideal user actions a good AntiVirus/AntiSpyware suite comes handy. Aside from instructing users on good practices.
So, in short, I believe that the government sponsoring healthy and good practices in their computing experiences is a very, very good idea.
I don't fucking get these benchmarks lately, I mean how credible is this crock of shit? You're benchmarking one STABLE system (Ubuntu) against an almost stable system (OpenSolaris) and against a Beta release (FreeBSD)... WOW that sure seems like a bad benchmark to me!
In a typical benchmark, FreeBSD would've simply owned Ubuntu, and OpenSolaris for that matter!
So, don't pay attention to these bullshit benchmarks, because they're worth shit, in my opinion.
Puh-lease, bitch.
Or, of course, it could go the other way around due to the fact that the IT certification industry is getting huge by making people with no experience and knowledge about any of IT or the different technologies and industries around it think that by just having an MCSE or CCNA/CCNP will make you an expert and help you land in the decently salaried IT industry.
I'm talking about this because, here where I live, I won't say there's a VERY HIGH demand of IT people but there's definetly a demand for competent people, not people with a bunch of acronyms after their name and not knowing the very basics or solve common problems. I see a lot of people with CCNA credentials that does not know the first thing about servers... or even the minimal systems administration skills that I would expect... likewise, I see a lot of MCSEs that does not know the first thing about even networking basics, like subnetting, basic TCP/IP, basic network design understanding, etc.
We need competent and qualified individuals, we do not need newbies looking for their dream job, for their "smart job", for the high-rewarding career change that was promised with the certifications.
What I could see hapening, at least for high IT jobs, in the Systems Admistration, Systems Engineering, Business Intelligence, Network Engineering. Network Security related skills combined with managerial skills, ethics, / ITIL is an organized Board of IT Professionals forming a licensiature (P.E., MT, or legal certification (CPA) to perform such jobs.
And based on this, the form of obtaining such status is either by education and some years of exeperience as an "IT Professioanl in practice", until reaching the required experience or by having X numbers of experience in the field as a low-level IT position relevant to the industry. IT Support positions, comes to my mind for a certain period of time and then taking course and passing the exam.
This is what I suspect anyways.
Quote: suso (153703)
"Here is what I can see happening. Its kinda grim, but its probably reality. I base this opinion on looking at other technologies like the telephone, radio and TV and seeing what has happened to the technicians in those fields.
When the technology is first new, you have the pioneers and the first maintainers who are paid a lot because the field is new and is in such a state of flux, it that you need the best and brightest people if you hope to hold you own in the industry. Eventually that field becomes more solid, easier to learn and there is a generation or two before you that are there for backup. Soon, management doesn't see the point of paying a lot (and probably rightfully so) to those technicians and everybody's mom and dad is capable of doing it. Its not something that you have to grow up knowing like a lot of us did, its something you can pick up out of high school. Its been said that being a system administrator is more of a lifestyle than a profession, but I think that will eventually change. Its unfortunate but I think we have to think about the future since a lot of us are young and will need to think about what will happen to the profession in our working lifetime. Programmers will probably be less commonitized to a degree, but still the value of the role will decrease a bit because software.
I think to some degree, this has already all happened if you compare the 90s and before with this decade. I hope I'm wrong about this though. The thing that really keeps us all going though is that the computer industry keeps reinventing itself with every new groundbreaking technology. I wrote about this before in a comment."
I'm Surprised that they are not doing this already. That begs the question, who's computers would host the bots? Patriotic Americans who allow the govt to install software on their machine to attack the enemy is all well and good but what happens when the alphabet soup figures out that the govt has software on most of America's PC's? RTFA. The computers that make part of the AF network will be the ones responsible for this.
XP main competitor. I think its quite obvious that the computer/IT market has changed dramatically over the past 10~15 years.
Let's classify the different markets into 2 categories, Business & Home.
In the business market: It's just more expensive for a business to upgrade all the computers at the same time for no real reason at all other than "it's the new thing out there". About 10 years ago it was simpler, in the sense that most businesses were starting to enter the DotCom age and therefore, IT resources weren't as many as we have today. IT infrastructure was more simple than the IT Infrastructure we are managing. 10 Years ago, yes, we had some specific applications that we had to take into consideration before even considering a massive upgrade. Nowadays, everybody within ANY company, big or small have everything running in a computer, *everything* and to make things worse, every applications for most departments are different. We am trying to say is that is not as easy to adopt Windows Vista, as it was to adopt Windows 2000 over NT4 or even XP/2003 over Windows 2000. We tried to look at the posibility of upgrading to Vista and we have only a few computers running Windows Vista Business Edition, mainly reserved to Execs and other people. Most of our current software set is not compatible with Windows Vista and that's what's holding us back. It's not that we don't like Vista, is just not the right option at the moment if we want to keep our jobs:-)
Now the Home market: Again, a very very different market than what it used to be 15~10 years ago. This market specifically tends to be the ones who either adopt very fast or adopt very slow. I remember people upgrading to Windows XP years before it was released. For whatever reasons, hardware limitations, budget limitations, or simply personal taste. The home market is the type of market that when it get used to something they don't want to change it. Maybe because for the use they give to their computer, maybe it just plain works for them and getting into the hassle of learning a new system, a system you can't predict like your old system because you don't know a lot of it, will really have influence into a buyers mind. Then we get the budget limitations, well, getting Vista MEANS getting a NEW computer. But, why should they feel the urge of spending money in times like now that what we have to do is save and spend wisely, our economy is not good we can't be spending like we used to do. I mean, they won't really get anything more than what they have except for cute graphics, all they want is a web browser, and email client and an office suite, oh and an IM'ing.
I mean, really... think about it, is it Microsoft or is it something else holding people from upgrading? I don't think Vista is as bad as people put it, out of 10 people who uses Vista, 7 say its good and that they like it (and use it everyday). 1 Didn't try to get along with it much and found everything very different and didn't like it and 2 used it at the local CompUSA/BestBuy store and didn't like it (and other people who did this very same thing told em it sucked). I mean, I don't know;)
mean, you can install a Trojan like that any Unix-like OS (other than OS X) if you follow ALL the necessary steps to install it. The problem is not whether it's possible to install a Trojan on certain operating systems; the problem is the easiness of how it can be done. In Mac OS X you have to click through several screens to "get infected" while on Windows you're only one click away of getting infected. That's the difference.
I mean, you can install a Trojan like that on a Unix-like (other than OS X) machine if you follow ALL the necessary steps to install it. The problem is not whether it's possible to install a Trojan on certain operating systems; the problem is the easiness of how it can be done. In Mac OS X you have to click through several screens to "get infected" while on Windows you're only one click away of getting infected. That's the difference.
OK, I understand that you filter copyright'd material, that's fine, I guess. But how can you block all P2P traffic? Not all the traffic in P2P networks are of copyright'd software/music/videos/ etc. People also use P2P to share sutff that isn't illegal, you know.
Yeah, I would like to see your mom or any person who is non-technical trying to configure the new digital cam she bought in wallmart in "her" Linux desktop. Maybe the problem doesn't have anything to do with Linux at all, maybe its a documentation problem, but you know, people aren't used to having to search millions of search results in Google to have their shit working, they *like* to plug it to the USB and have it working, *some* of them bother reading through the documentation their new devices brought, but I assure you, none of them have a "HOW To" or anything to get it working in Linux, *you* have to search it yourself. So, what is hard? That depends. But somehow, I see a lot of people trying Linux and getting themselves back to their Windows "zone". *I* don't think it's a "this is what I'm used to use" type of problem, because the same people try Mac and stay in Mac. People looking for alternatives usually find them.
I've been reading since late 1999 how close Linux is to be the "next" popular operating system for the masses. How ready Linux is to be the next operating system for my grandma. I, myself, use Linux (sorry, GNU/Linux) and I find it very useful for certain tasks, and certain applications. But, does it work out of the box? well, sometimes. Does Windows works out of the box? Well, sometimes too. But for what my mom would be doing with a PC, yes, it mostly works out of the box. If I have to say which operating system will be the next "desktop operating system", I'm gonna have to say that if such thing exist, it will be Mac OS. Mac it's just getting to popular, to into the mainstream. That's all you need. Forget about functionality, it's all about the media. Mac OS is just one of those few things that works as advertised (in my experience.)
Anyways, just talking about my experiences.
Cheers;)
People would've had higher expectations if the approval thing would've made public by the FCC. I mean, think about it this way, it's better that Apple talks about some of the features that *will* be present in the iPhone (if it gets approved of course), than people simply thinking about stuff that is VERY likely to not be present, like, I don't know. Think about something just way too futuristic and impossible for our time.
The upgrades fees are a pain in the ass, eh? I think it's a bigger pain in the ass having to run XP Pro on machines that are running Windows 95 and 98... I mean, I could easly assume that those are old machines... and we all know how XP treats old computer systems.
Maybe a really customized Ubuntu (or any other distro for that matter) installation will run perfectly on all computers.
Good luck.
The thing is, that MCP exams are not about click here, click there. They're about solving problems and finding the best solution. You know, it's not as if the exam asks you "Where is the main windows directory" - "Where do you find Computer Management, what is Active Directory?"
If IBM was supposed to lose money if Apple ditch them, then I am very sure they would've give Apple the discounts they wanted... Otherwise, it only means they could care less, it won't affect them.
Slashdot Mirror
It all sounds fine, all except for a subtle detail: you're making up everything you just said. The article didn't mention anything about cops or half the bullshit you just wrote.
Stick to the fucking article, stick to the fucking article!
Yep, pigs flu... I mean, flew. Bad joke, I know, I know.
You know people like to complain a lot. Specially when it's about Microsoft. :-)
Somehow they have this weird logic of upgrading to Windows 7 to use Windows XP.
Why is this Microsoft fault or problem for that matter? They made up their minds on something, whether its good or bad, that's really beyond this discussion. Chip makers have to adjust to that decision, and so happens that Intel isn't quite prepared for that kind of strategy. It seems that the only company in trouble here is Intel.
Yes at all. It's pretty much the same effort US government is doing in making sure everyone completes the transition to digital TV.
They're not promoting X brand of digital TV converters or XY cable TV company or XYZ satellite TV company. It's the same thing really, and you're taking it out of context.
I agree that promoting ONLY the use of an anti-malware software as a solution to security problems is not the way to go. However, promoting the best practices of computer security (which includes having an up-to-date AntiVirus) would be a good way to start.
We could argue about how secure is Linux or any other operating system in the hands of a security unaware individual. But that's not the point, because last I heard more than 80% of the world computers run on Windows and their operators are not experts or have any sense of security.
Usually Linux users are more technical people (even home users) and usually posses knowledge and common sense regarding security. I don't think they would be the scope of this idea, rather the other 99 percent of the users that don't have a clue.
Seems like you're taking (greatly) out of context the idea.
I don't think any money should go to advertise software companies, rather than to promote good computing practices. If you think it's a waste of money, you should think a bit more about the amount of money that flows through the Internet.
As our lives become more and more connected, I see this as a requirement. More and more people everyday start making money transfers, purchases, and basically any transaction that they would otherwise do physically over the Internet, yet, they do it so carelessly without even knowing the risks and consequences of their careless actions.
It wouldn't hurt to just let them know and inform them. After all people even pay taxes over the Internet, I think this should concern the government a bit too, wouldn't you agree?
I think it's a bit irrational to only blame the OS vendors.
Although I, of course agree that software companies should build secure software from the get-go you also have to understand that much of the blame also goes to the user. They shouldn't be opening (or clicking for that matter) ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that passes through their mailbox or instant messenger.
And I believe that to prevent bad or unideal user actions a good AntiVirus/AntiSpyware suite comes handy. Aside from instructing users on good practices.
So, in short, I believe that the government sponsoring healthy and good practices in their computing experiences is a very, very good idea.
This clearly shows that the patent system is broken. Sun have been working on a 3D Desktop since the early 2000s.
More info: http://www.sun.com/software/looking_glass/
I don't fucking get these benchmarks lately, I mean how credible is this crock of shit? You're benchmarking one STABLE system (Ubuntu) against an almost stable system (OpenSolaris) and against a Beta release (FreeBSD)... WOW that sure seems like a bad benchmark to me! In a typical benchmark, FreeBSD would've simply owned Ubuntu, and OpenSolaris for that matter! So, don't pay attention to these bullshit benchmarks, because they're worth shit, in my opinion. Puh-lease, bitch.
Or, of course, it could go the other way around due to the fact that the IT certification industry is getting huge by making people with no experience and knowledge about any of IT or the different technologies and industries around it think that by just having an MCSE or CCNA/CCNP will make you an expert and help you land in the decently salaried IT industry.
I'm talking about this because, here where I live, I won't say there's a VERY HIGH demand of IT people but there's definetly a demand for competent people, not people with a bunch of acronyms after their name and not knowing the very basics or solve common problems. I see a lot of people with CCNA credentials that does not know the first thing about servers... or even the minimal systems administration skills that I would expect... likewise, I see a lot of MCSEs that does not know the first thing about even networking basics, like subnetting, basic TCP/IP, basic network design understanding, etc.
We need competent and qualified individuals, we do not need newbies looking for their dream job, for their "smart job", for the high-rewarding career change that was promised with the certifications.
What I could see hapening, at least for high IT jobs, in the Systems Admistration, Systems Engineering, Business Intelligence, Network Engineering. Network Security related skills combined with managerial skills, ethics, / ITIL is an organized Board of IT Professionals forming a licensiature (P.E., MT, or legal certification (CPA) to perform such jobs.
And based on this, the form of obtaining such status is either by education and some years of exeperience as an "IT Professioanl in practice", until reaching the required experience or by having X numbers of experience in the field as a low-level IT position relevant to the industry. IT Support positions, comes to my mind for a certain period of time and then taking course and passing the exam.
This is what I suspect anyways.
Quote: suso (153703)
"Here is what I can see happening. Its kinda grim, but its probably reality. I base this opinion on looking at other technologies like the telephone, radio and TV and seeing what has happened to the technicians in those fields.
When the technology is first new, you have the pioneers and the first maintainers who are paid a lot because the field is new and is in such a state of flux, it that you need the best and brightest people if you hope to hold you own in the industry. Eventually that field becomes more solid, easier to learn and there is a generation or two before you that are there for backup. Soon, management doesn't see the point of paying a lot (and probably rightfully so) to those technicians and everybody's mom and dad is capable of doing it. Its not something that you have to grow up knowing like a lot of us did, its something you can pick up out of high school. Its been said that being a system administrator is more of a lifestyle than a profession, but I think that will eventually change. Its unfortunate but I think we have to think about the future since a lot of us are young and will need to think about what will happen to the profession in our working lifetime. Programmers will probably be less commonitized to a degree, but still the value of the role will decrease a bit because software.
I think to some degree, this has already all happened if you compare the 90s and before with this decade. I hope I'm wrong about this though. The thing that really keeps us all going though is that the computer industry keeps reinventing itself with every new groundbreaking technology. I wrote about this before in a comment."
ISAMOTHERFUCKINGCOCKSUCKINGPOSER. Uh... sorry, they keys are like right next to each other.
XP main competitor. I think its quite obvious that the computer/IT market has changed dramatically over the past 10~15 years.
:-)
;)
Let's classify the different markets into 2 categories, Business & Home.
In the business market:
It's just more expensive for a business to upgrade all the computers at the same time for no real reason at all other than "it's the new thing out there". About 10 years ago it was simpler, in the sense that most businesses were starting to enter the DotCom age and therefore, IT resources weren't as many as we have today. IT infrastructure was more simple than the IT Infrastructure we are managing. 10 Years ago, yes, we had some specific applications that we had to take into consideration before even considering a massive upgrade. Nowadays, everybody within ANY company, big or small have everything running in a computer, *everything* and to make things worse, every applications for most departments are different. We am trying to say is that is not as easy to adopt Windows Vista, as it was to adopt Windows 2000 over NT4 or even XP/2003 over Windows 2000. We tried to look at the posibility of upgrading to Vista and we have only a few computers running Windows Vista Business Edition, mainly reserved to Execs and other people. Most of our current software set is not compatible with Windows Vista and that's what's holding us back. It's not that we don't like Vista, is just not the right option at the moment if we want to keep our jobs
Now the Home market:
Again, a very very different market than what it used to be 15~10 years ago. This market specifically tends to be the ones who either adopt very fast or adopt very slow. I remember people upgrading to Windows XP years before it was released. For whatever reasons, hardware limitations, budget limitations, or simply personal taste. The home market is the type of market that when it get used to something they don't want to change it. Maybe because for the use they give to their computer, maybe it just plain works for them and getting into the hassle of learning a new system, a system you can't predict like your old system because you don't know a lot of it, will really have influence into a buyers mind. Then we get the budget limitations, well, getting Vista MEANS getting a NEW computer. But, why should they feel the urge of spending money in times like now that what we have to do is save and spend wisely, our economy is not good we can't be spending like we used to do. I mean, they won't really get anything more than what they have except for cute graphics, all they want is a web browser, and email client and an office suite, oh and an IM'ing.
I mean, really... think about it, is it Microsoft or is it something else holding people from upgrading? I don't think Vista is as bad as people put it, out of 10 people who uses Vista, 7 say its good and that they like it (and use it everyday). 1 Didn't try to get along with it much and found everything very different and didn't like it and 2 used it at the local CompUSA/BestBuy store and didn't like it (and other people who did this very same thing told em it sucked). I mean, I don't know
mean, you can install a Trojan like that any Unix-like OS (other than OS X) if you follow ALL the necessary steps to install it. The problem is not whether it's possible to install a Trojan on certain operating systems; the problem is the easiness of how it can be done. In Mac OS X you have to click through several screens to "get infected" while on Windows you're only one click away of getting infected. That's the difference.
I mean, you can install a Trojan like that on a Unix-like (other than OS X) machine if you follow ALL the necessary steps to install it. The problem is not whether it's possible to install a Trojan on certain operating systems; the problem is the easiness of how it can be done. In Mac OS X you have to click through several screens to "get infected" while on Windows you're only one click away of getting infected. That's the difference.
OK, I understand that you filter copyright'd material, that's fine, I guess. But how can you block all P2P traffic? Not all the traffic in P2P networks are of copyright'd software/music/videos/ etc. People also use P2P to share sutff that isn't illegal, you know.
Yeah, I would like to see your mom or any person who is non-technical trying to configure the new digital cam she bought in wallmart in "her" Linux desktop. Maybe the problem doesn't have anything to do with Linux at all, maybe its a documentation problem, but you know, people aren't used to having to search millions of search results in Google to have their shit working, they *like* to plug it to the USB and have it working, *some* of them bother reading through the documentation their new devices brought, but I assure you, none of them have a "HOW To" or anything to get it working in Linux, *you* have to search it yourself. So, what is hard? That depends. But somehow, I see a lot of people trying Linux and getting themselves back to their Windows "zone". *I* don't think it's a "this is what I'm used to use" type of problem, because the same people try Mac and stay in Mac. People looking for alternatives usually find them.
I've been reading since late 1999 how close Linux is to be the "next" popular operating system for the masses. How ready Linux is to be the next operating system for my grandma. I, myself, use Linux (sorry, GNU/Linux) and I find it very useful for certain tasks, and certain applications. But, does it work out of the box? well, sometimes. Does Windows works out of the box? Well, sometimes too. But for what my mom would be doing with a PC, yes, it mostly works out of the box. If I have to say which operating system will be the next "desktop operating system", I'm gonna have to say that if such thing exist, it will be Mac OS. Mac it's just getting to popular, to into the mainstream. That's all you need. Forget about functionality, it's all about the media. Mac OS is just one of those few things that works as advertised (in my experience.) Anyways, just talking about my experiences. Cheers ;)
People would've had higher expectations if the approval thing would've made public by the FCC. I mean, think about it this way, it's better that Apple talks about some of the features that *will* be present in the iPhone (if it gets approved of course), than people simply thinking about stuff that is VERY likely to not be present, like, I don't know. Think about something just way too futuristic and impossible for our time.
What you have to hope is that the X Window System that you use supports these... the Linux kernel doesn't have anything to do with this.
Also, it make hair grow in funny places.
The upgrades fees are a pain in the ass, eh? I think it's a bigger pain in the ass having to run XP Pro on machines that are running Windows 95 and 98... I mean, I could easly assume that those are old machines... and we all know how XP treats old computer systems. Maybe a really customized Ubuntu (or any other distro for that matter) installation will run perfectly on all computers. Good luck.
The thing is, that MCP exams are not about click here, click there. They're about solving problems and finding the best solution. You know, it's not as if the exam asks you "Where is the main windows directory" - "Where do you find Computer Management, what is Active Directory?"
If IBM was supposed to lose money if Apple ditch them, then I am very sure they would've give Apple the discounts they wanted... Otherwise, it only means they could care less, it won't affect them.