On Friday 12 November 2004 16:35, Jack wrote: > >So, when I see someone complain about Linux not being ready for primetime > >because it doesn't include something like voice recognition (nice but most > >people wouldn't classify that as a major necessity), > > Bryan, voice recognition saves me *hours and hours* of work in my line > of business (which is teaching, which is "document-creation" oriented.)
I am being comparitive, just as you were. Your subject matter was that Mandrake was not ready for "primetime." I was merely making the observation that VR software would not fall into the category of "primetime" in my lexicon. In my view, having a secure operating system is a requirement for "primetime" while having voice recognition software is "not." YMMV, but I have a feeling, at least from this list, that most Linux users would be more apt to agree with my assessment. > Bryan, good post and some valid observations. If you re-read my initial > post, you will see that I mentioned that Linux appears to be more > secure. However, let me play devil's advocate here. Is it more secure > because it is inherently virus/trojan resistant, or is more secure > because it is being largely ignored by the malicious hacker community? > I suspect a combination of both. The first Internet worm that I am aware of that spread in the Wild was the worm released in 1988 by Robert Tappan Morris. It was written and did infect Sun and VMX machines running 4 BSD Unix. That being said, I don't think that popularity of OS has much of anything to do with successful virus writing and targeting compared to the ease of affect of creating a successful virus or worm. I do agree that the malicious hacker community appears to be largely ignoring Linux, however, Unix has been around for longer than Windows, it was also the first computer system infected by a worm, and many of the same design features and software are available and working on both Linux and Unix systems. They also share some of the same vulnerabilities, such as they are. In my view, much fewer than for some other OS's that will remain nameless. That having been said, it seems to me that the malicious virus writing community is largely ignoring Linux because the effort required to write for Linux is immense while the likely rewards due to the secure design and rapid response are low. They, just like you and I, tend to focus their efforts to get the biggest bang for their bucks. Just so happens that a successful Linux virus would have a huge effect on the Internet, some major corporations, etc. but it would be extremely difficult to successfully pull it off and the OS community would likely nullify the effects as soon as it was discovered. Thus, the more successful the virus, the shorter lasting it would be. I have seen nothing yet to convince me that any virus writer or malicious hacker would refrain from the opportunity to bring Google down, if they were able to do so. > BTW, I appreciate the lack of a "harsh response." *Open* dialogue > allows growth. "Witch hunting" has never been good for intellectual > growth. Well, one last point that I would make. Voice recognition software is a specialized application that has, at best, a very small audience as its target. The same reason that manufacturers ignore Linux might also account for the dearth of voice recognition software, in general, and especially for Linux. Couple to that the fact that much of Linux software is open source and much of that is free, and you see yet another benefit of Linux that might account somewhat for the lack of a package. It might be worth it to you to accept Digital Rights Management, closed source, proprietary software methods and other drawbacks of the modern commercial software industry in order to have VR software that works. It would not be for most of the people that use Linux. This does tend to limit the number of people that might be interested in producing such an application. Add to that the general lack of good open source driver support from hardware manufacturers, including for sound cards, with audio input capability and you have yet another limiting factor. We all have to make choices and the nature of choices means sometimes making sacrifices. This is probably one of those sacrifices. If you are as software agnostic as you have said, then you are probably not in the mood to make sacrifices in order to gain the (perhaps marginal to you) benefits of Linux. But, Open Source is all about choices and if Windows works better for you, I do not have any personal stake in you using Linux. Two roads diverged in a wood, and Iâ I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. - Robert Frost -- Bryan Phinney
____________________________________________________ Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com Join the Club : http://www.mandrakeclub.com ____________________________________________________
