I agree. The fact that micro$oft prevents its users from being able to
understand the source code is disconcerning. Users can go to school and
learn everything there is to know about operating the system, but they
will never understand the intimate details of the source. You shouldn't
trust what you can't understand. (before I'm flamed...yes, I know
nothing about the linux source code, nor how to use my system.
At least with linux, you have the opportunity to discover everything
about the system. Although all the dual-booters can attest that windows
is easier to operate, I'm sure that as they get more familiar with
linux, they will understand how powerful they can be over the system,
and not the other way around.
(As soon as I learn how *not* to trash my system, I won't use windows at
all, but as it stands, I'm very good at trashing and rebuilding my Linux
box!! :)
Where's the control panel?? I can't find my cdrom!!, lol)
Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
>
> That reminds me of a bug that was found in Win95 and 98. Apparently
> after 50 days of continuous uptime your system will crash -- no matter
> what. Your machine could be sitting there idle and it would still
> crash. What puzzles me is how someone actually managed to find this
> bug. How can anyone get a day, let alone 50 days, of uptime out of
> their Windows machine?
>
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 00:15, jennifer wrote:
> > If you think thtaa micro$oft having your password is bad, think of
> > this....
> >
> > One company, huge monopoly, solely responsible for the source code
> > on the worlds business and home computers for the past 20 years....
> >
> > What if they were secretly implanting code in all there Os's that
> > could shut down all systems on a specified date, unless we, the
> > people submitted to Mr. Gates demands.
> >
> > Far-fetched yes, but impossible? My worry is not about micro$ofts
> > monopoly...It is with the stringent secrecy in which the develop
> > their products.
> >
> > Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
> > > On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 21:32, Solver wrote:
> > > > Just as a note - I wouldn't mind if MS had my password. I would
> > > > only mind if they could erase hard drive.
> > >
> > > If they had your password they COULD erase your hard drive. They
> > > could get your e-mail, your credit card deails (if you ever typed
> > > them into your computer) -- in fact anything they wanted, from
> > > you. And if you didn't use a variant of NT (Win 95/98/ME) you
> > > wouldn't even have a password. You would be left wide-open for any
> > > script-kiddie to exploit. And if you DID use a variant of NT, you
> > > would still be vulnerable, since everybody knows that MS has a bad
> > > track record with bugs, security and virii.
> > >
> > > > I hate when I reboot it twice a day, too.
> > >
> > > I reboot my computer once a week on average (i.e. I get about a
> > > week of uptime). This rebooting is not due to any problem, it's
> > > just because I feel like it. In my two years of using GNU/Linux I
> > > have only had a few system crashes. Sure, individual applications
> > > crash, but this doesn't affect the rest of the system, and I can
> > > just restart that programme and work as before.
> > >
> > > > I have Office XP, and the voice recognition really helps. Can't
> > > > wait for it in StarOffice.
> > >
> > > IBM ViaVoice, which is FAR better than the voice recognition in XP
> > > (IBM and Dragon are the best in the field), is also available for
> > > GNU/Linux. BTW, did you actually PAY that much money for Office
> > > XP? I can't remember when I last paid for software (I think it was
> > > 1998, when Windows came pre-installed on my then-new machine).
> > >
> > > > When I bought a PC, I was asked, do I want it's C: drive
> > > > formatted, and said yes.
> > > > Bill Gates said that the fact that everyone can recompile the
> > > > source code is what he doesn't like about Linux. Perhaps he's
> > > > right.
> > >
> > > Are you KIDDING?! What is wrong with being able to do that? That
> > > has got to be Linux's greatest strength! You can compile a kernel
> > > (or even a whole system) to suit YOUR own machine, not some thing
> > > that MS wants you to buy to get "optimal performance". I can
> > > customise my kernel to have what I want, making it fully optimised
> > > for my particular combination of hardware. For example, Mandrake's
> > > RPMs come pre-compiled for an i586 (Pentium-class) procesors. I
> > > can squeeze a bit of extra performance by recompiling the SRPM to
> > > an i686 binary, since I have a Pentium II. If I have a
> > > multi-processor system, I can compile for SMP, and take advantage
> > > of features like multi-processor threading far better than a
> > > pre-compiled Windows. Similarly, if I want to run GNU/Linux on a
> > > i386, I can compile for that. What is WIndows XP optimised for? My
> > > guess would be i686, i.e. a Pentium II or III. Try running it on
> > > anything lower, and it will work painfully slow -- not just
> > > because it is bloated and not designed for those processors, but
> > > also because it is not and cannot be compiled for these
> > > processors. Similarly, if I had an Athlon or a Pentium IV (or an
> > > Alpha, a Power PC, a Sparc, an ARM, etc.), I could compile my
> > > system for that processor especially, hence taking full advantage
> > > of that particular processor. Windows, being closed-source, cannot
> > > do this. GNU/Linux has the potential to make use of new processor
> > > features like MMX, 3DNow! and Streaming SIMD (AKA MMX2) far more
> > > efficiently and far better than can Windows, or any Microsoft
> > > product for that matter.
> > >
> > > Did Uncle Bill actually give a reason for his concern, or do you
> > > just believe him because he's rich?
> > >
> > > > Windows could be more customizable, though, even remaining
> > > > closed-source.
> > >
> > > Windows can never be as configurable as GNU/Linux if it remains
> > > closed soiurce. The best they can do is have options (or even
> > > auto-detection) for features like MMX or multiple processors. This
> > > doesn't mean they are (or can be) optimised for them, though.
> > >
> > > > Solver
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Sridhar Dhanapalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > To: "Solver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Linux Newbie"
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 5:03 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [newbie] No-one uses Linux, says Microsoft
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 04:48, Solver wrote:
> > > > > > I love Microsoft. I respect Bill Gates. Not only they ain't
> > > > > > my enemies - they are my friends. Yes, I like Linux, it's
> > > > > > enhanced functionality and especially stability, but
> > > > > > Microsoft were the first to do it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since when was Windows stable? And even if it is, were they
> > > > > really the "first to do it"? As a former Windows-user (yes,
> > > > > I've even used Win2K), I can say that Windows is the most
> > > > > crash-prone OS I've ever come across. If it wern't for the
> > > > > lack of applications, I would've stayed with OS/2 and DOS
> > > > > instead of switching to WIndows.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I believe that they're doing everything the right way.
> > > > > > Also, the monopoly situation is very good for users. You can
> > > > > > put your file on a disk, go to a friend being sure you'll
> > > > > > find the same Windows and Word there. The worst I could
> > > > > > imagine is this: Windows - 40%
> > > > > > Linux - 30%
> > > > > > MacOS - 10%
> > > > > > BeOS - 5%
> > > > > > Solaris - 5%
> > > > > > Other - 5%
> > > > >
> > > > > This will never happen. Windows, GNU/Linux and MacOS will
> > > > > dominate. BeOS and Solaris, while being excellent OSs, will
> > > > > not survive on the desktop. Solaris still has a lot of life on
> > > > > the server, though.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Then you would be usnure as to what will you find there. If
> > > > > > Linux user, you had to save both for Linux and Windows
> > > > > > formats, and Mac doesn't read these disks. So, you would
> > > > > > need to know specifically where are you going, and what the
> > > > > > PCs are there. Each time I go to repair a PC, I'm almost
> > > > > > sure what I'll see there.
> > > > >
> > > > > Microsoft love to create a "lock-in", or "venus flytrap"
> > > > > situation. They entice you to use their products, and make it
> > > > > very difficult for you to leave. MS Word's (before XP) file
> > > > > format deliberately contains a lot of binary code, making it
> > > > > difficult for a competitor to make an import/export filter for
> > > > > it, and hence locking people into MS Word. Internet Explorer
> > > > > accepts a twisted, proprietary form of HTML, foring web
> > > > > designers to make pages that only work best in IE (since it is
> > > > > the most widely used browser). Since pages look best in IE,
> > > > > more people use it, creating a viscous cycle.
> > > > >
> > > > > Open standards and open file formats like W3C HTML and other
> > > > > XML-based formats (e.g. the new OpenOffice and Office XP
> > > > > formats) are what encourage innovation in the industry, since
> > > > > they are fully open to everyone. The StarOffice (now
> > > > > OpenOffice) people have done a wonderful job at
> > > > > reverse-engineering the binary MS Office formats. Parsing the
> > > > > Office XP formats, being XML-based, has been much easier for
> > > > > them, and has made them more competitive. With open formats
> > > > > like this, it doesn't matter what programme you use, or what
> > > > > platform you use. OpenOffice is shaping up to be a real MS
> > > > > Office-killer, and it is available on a multitude of
> > > > > platforms, including GNU/Linux and WIndows.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Microsoft are responsible for what they release. They
> > > > > > provide the product to you, and given you buy it legally,
> > > > > > they also provide you with support, updates, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > Like these?
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092434,00.html
> > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2772328,00.html
> > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092585,00.html
> > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092661,00.html
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a danger with closed-source software: you have no idea
> > > > > what's inside. For all we know, everyone's passwords are
> > > > > probably being forwarded to Microsoft.
> > > > >
> > > > > > You can register at Linux Counter and
> > > > > > others, but they won't give you that support, even though
> > > > > > bug reporting is awesome.
> > > > >
> > > > > You can buy support from distro vendors (Mandrake, Red Hat,
> > > > > etc.) This is just like any other software. You get what you
> > > > > pay for. GNU/Linux is free, and you get free support in the
> > > > > form of neewsgroups and mailing lists. If you want official
> > > > > support, you have to pay. It still works out cheaper than
> > > > > paying for propritary software, since you're paying purely for
> > > > > support, not for the software. You can't expect something for
> > > > > nothing.
> > > > >
> > > > > > And, another thing I love in Linux are the
> > > > > > penguins. I love that they're everywhere, and one of my
> > > > > > recompilation jobs will be to put even more penguins on
> > > > > > their work at Linux desktop and applications. They just look
> > > > > > cool - nice animals.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tux rulez :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > > Also, I'd like to add that I hate to buy PC with
> > > > > > preinstalled software. When I got one with preinstalled
> > > > > > Windows (what I used then), the first thing I done was
> > > > > > formatting C: and installing it myself. Now I use dual-boot
> > > > > > W98, and Linux Mandrake. If I bought a PC with this dual
> > > > > > boot, I'd still run Partition Magic and wipe it all, to
> > > > > > install myself. I don't love when something is preinstalled.
> > > > > > As a PC expert, I want to install everything myself - even
> > > > > > if this is something I never installed. Yes, I did feel
> > > > > > unsure installing Windows for the first time, as I also did
> > > > > > installing Linux and BeOS for the first time. It all passes.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you buy a new PC, chances are it'll have WIndows
> > > > > pre-installed. Whether you actually use that or something else
> > > > > doesn't matter, you are paying MS for it. Buying a system
> > > > > without Windows can considerably lower the cost of a PC (I
> > > > > think it is somewhere in the order of 10%).
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems to me like you're simply believing all the FUD
> > > > > vomited out by those at Microsoft and their allies (e.g.
> >
> > ZDNet). There is
> >
> > > > > more than one side to the coin.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Sridhar Dhanapalan.
> > > > > "There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
> > > > > LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
> > > > > -- Jeremy S. Anderson
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sridhar Dhanapalan.
> > > "There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
> > > LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
> > > -- Jeremy S. Anderson
>
> --
> Sridhar Dhanapalan.
> "There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
> LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
> -- Jeremy S. Anderson
