Some linux users really bug me...
-
My neighbor is a linux user, now I have nothing against linux users or linux. However when there only reason for linux being better is "Windows sucks" or "Microsoft sucks" it gets really damn annoying. He doesn't really have anything to back up his "Microsoft sucks" argument. I also find it ironic that he seems to have an "infinite knowledge" (or so he thinks) of how Windows works even though he hasn't by his own admission used Windows since the early days of Windows 98. He also tried convincing me that the XP EULA said that gave Microsoft unrestricted access to your computer even on the hardware level :wtf:, which by the way isn't in there. In fact I quoted several sections of the EULA and he didn't recognize any of it and even accuesed me of lying about it. Does anyone else have to put up with this type of people on a regular basis? -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John SimmonsI know people who work with Windows, use Windows at home, know Windows intimately and still the conspiracy theories go on (and on, and on, and on). My personal favourite: "But Windows XP sends a hidden signal to Microsoft's server every time you do a search on your own harddrive. Pretty disturbing huh?" Well, no, not really. If you wanted to test for a good internet connection, wouldn't you ping your own server? Believe me, I'm on a 56K modem, there ain't any more than 500 bytes going down that wire. If Microsoft can find 500 bytes of critical data and send them, good luck to them. Maybe that's why the Indexing Service went insane on me a few weeks ago? Maybe it's searching for my credit cards details! :omg::omg::omg: :rolleyes: Paul
-
My neighbor is a linux user, now I have nothing against linux users or linux. However when there only reason for linux being better is "Windows sucks" or "Microsoft sucks" it gets really damn annoying. He doesn't really have anything to back up his "Microsoft sucks" argument. I also find it ironic that he seems to have an "infinite knowledge" (or so he thinks) of how Windows works even though he hasn't by his own admission used Windows since the early days of Windows 98. He also tried convincing me that the XP EULA said that gave Microsoft unrestricted access to your computer even on the hardware level :wtf:, which by the way isn't in there. In fact I quoted several sections of the EULA and he didn't recognize any of it and even accuesed me of lying about it. Does anyone else have to put up with this type of people on a regular basis? -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John SimmonsThey think because they use something vaguely rarish they are elite. Yes, it takes some skill, but taking the path of maximum resistance just for the sake of it doesn't make you part of an elite, it just makes you silly(IMHO). I use Linux for security, but for dev, MS rocks :-D
Dave Goodman on funny error messages:
It is a definite no-no to run BITMAP as a user command. Your nose will grow, your lawn will die, your hair will fall out, and your first-born will marry an aardvark. Shame on you! -
They think because they use something vaguely rarish they are elite. Yes, it takes some skill, but taking the path of maximum resistance just for the sake of it doesn't make you part of an elite, it just makes you silly(IMHO). I use Linux for security, but for dev, MS rocks :-D
Dave Goodman on funny error messages:
It is a definite no-no to run BITMAP as a user command. Your nose will grow, your lawn will die, your hair will fall out, and your first-born will marry an aardvark. Shame on you!What makes linux more secure.....is it rock-solid...does it not require patches (ok as many as windows...) ...or is it simple tough to hack.. Kannan
-
What makes linux more secure.....is it rock-solid...does it not require patches (ok as many as windows...) ...or is it simple tough to hack.. Kannan
Linux is more secure because there's less hacking tools and viruses out there for it. A quality hacker could get past that anyway but a quality hacker is less likely to do any serious harm when they get there too. It's also more secure because it's more simple. The less there is to something, the less likely it is that it'll break. Paul Life is just a sexually transmitted desease - Matthew Wright (ex-journalist, TV presenter) 10-Oct-02 I finally have a sig! - Paul Riley (part-time deity) 10-Oct-02
-
What makes linux more secure.....is it rock-solid...does it not require patches (ok as many as windows...) ...or is it simple tough to hack.. Kannan
Sorry, I didn't mean like that. We use it for intrusion detection, and also to try and hack our own systems (if we can hack them, so can the script kiddies). Most crackers have that elitist attitude and use Unix systems for their fun, so it's best to use the same tools they have available to test our systems from the outside. :cool:
Dave Goodman on funny error messages:
It is a definite no-no to run BITMAP as a user command. Your nose will grow, your lawn will die, your hair will fall out, and your first-born will marry an aardvark. Shame on you! -
Linux is more secure because there's less hacking tools and viruses out there for it. A quality hacker could get past that anyway but a quality hacker is less likely to do any serious harm when they get there too. It's also more secure because it's more simple. The less there is to something, the less likely it is that it'll break. Paul Life is just a sexually transmitted desease - Matthew Wright (ex-journalist, TV presenter) 10-Oct-02 I finally have a sig! - Paul Riley (part-time deity) 10-Oct-02
That virus thing is soooo true - seems like all the angry young dudes (dudettes) out there have some vendetta against MS :laugh:
Dave Goodman on funny error messages:
It is a definite no-no to run BITMAP as a user command. Your nose will grow, your lawn will die, your hair will fall out, and your first-born will marry an aardvark. Shame on you! -
Anyone who's a zealot for anything has something to learn. Linus is not god, and neither is Bill. In fact there is no god, no black and white -- only shades of grey.
as long as I live it will be fine / there's nothing what I can do /
the world will die and so do I / so why should I take care
'Take Care' Funker Vogtso you admit that theres "grey" :)
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, a sore thumb you will have."
-
Linux is more secure because there's less hacking tools and viruses out there for it. A quality hacker could get past that anyway but a quality hacker is less likely to do any serious harm when they get there too. It's also more secure because it's more simple. The less there is to something, the less likely it is that it'll break. Paul Life is just a sexually transmitted desease - Matthew Wright (ex-journalist, TV presenter) 10-Oct-02 I finally have a sig! - Paul Riley (part-time deity) 10-Oct-02
something is not more secure because there are less tools for attacking it, just lucky. also more simple does not always mean more secure... :-D
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, a sore thumb you will have."
-
Linux has got it's place. "I'll let you work out where" :-) But yeah, I find some of them to be like religious fanatics, who are blind to all but their own belief. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
Colin Davies wrote: Linux has got it's place. I agree... Colin Davies wrote: But yeah, I find some of them to be like religious fanatics, who are blind to all but their own belief. ... but this is what bothers me -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John Simmons -
I know people who work with Windows, use Windows at home, know Windows intimately and still the conspiracy theories go on (and on, and on, and on). My personal favourite: "But Windows XP sends a hidden signal to Microsoft's server every time you do a search on your own harddrive. Pretty disturbing huh?" Well, no, not really. If you wanted to test for a good internet connection, wouldn't you ping your own server? Believe me, I'm on a 56K modem, there ain't any more than 500 bytes going down that wire. If Microsoft can find 500 bytes of critical data and send them, good luck to them. Maybe that's why the Indexing Service went insane on me a few weeks ago? Maybe it's searching for my credit cards details! :omg::omg::omg: :rolleyes: Paul
I know people tell me that and I religiously watch all outgoing and incoming traffic very closely on my computer and the only time it sends anything off I have approved it. Paul Riley wrote: Maybe that's why the Indexing Service went insane on me a few weeks ago? Maybe it's searching for my credit cards details! Most people don't realize how much Indexing Service can compress life threatining personal details and CC numbers. I heard all the way to 500 bytes :) -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John Simmons -
something is not more secure because there are less tools for attacking it, just lucky. also more simple does not always mean more secure... :-D
"When the only tool you have is a hammer, a sore thumb you will have."
Philip Fitzsimons wrote: something is not more secure because there are less tools for attacking it, just lucky. I disagree. If less people can break into one brand of car over another, the first brand is considered more secure. Fact remains that a locksmith can get into pretty much any car. Whether this is due to some bizarre desire on the part of a group of jealous idiots to prove one type of car vulnerable or because it was designed that way is irrelevant. Philip Fitzsimons wrote: also more simple does not always mean more secure That's true, but it's often the case and I think you'll find it in this case in particular. How many security patches for Windows are because of periferal (often unnecessary) parts of the OS? Paul Life is just a sexually transmitted desease - Matthew Wright (ex-journalist, TV presenter) 10-Oct-02 I finally have a sig! - Paul Riley (part-time deity) 10-Oct-02
-
What makes linux more secure.....is it rock-solid...does it not require patches (ok as many as windows...) ...or is it simple tough to hack.. Kannan
Kannan Kalyanaraman wrote: does it not require patches It, in my experience, still needs patches but because of the sheer number of people working on linux the turn around rate is a lot higher than any company could handle. Also they definitely try to keep updates low key so they don't catch the eyes of the windows users they just bashed the day before on /. for the latest MS update :) -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John Simmons -
Sellout! You'll never reach Linux heaven now. :-D -- Please state the nature of your medical emergency.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Linux heaven Nerdvana?:) Word of the day: Rotundacrat
Extra Credit will be awarded for: Quasimobo... -
My neighbor is a linux user, now I have nothing against linux users or linux. However when there only reason for linux being better is "Windows sucks" or "Microsoft sucks" it gets really damn annoying. He doesn't really have anything to back up his "Microsoft sucks" argument. I also find it ironic that he seems to have an "infinite knowledge" (or so he thinks) of how Windows works even though he hasn't by his own admission used Windows since the early days of Windows 98. He also tried convincing me that the XP EULA said that gave Microsoft unrestricted access to your computer even on the hardware level :wtf:, which by the way isn't in there. In fact I quoted several sections of the EULA and he didn't recognize any of it and even accuesed me of lying about it. Does anyone else have to put up with this type of people on a regular basis? -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John SimmonsMatt Newman wrote: He doesn't really have anything to back up his "Microsoft sucks" argument. He doesn't? How about XP? Even better, how about Palladium or Passport? What about Microsoft's "Media PC that was going to restrict use of things that were recorded on it? How about MS trying to shuffle new and tougher restrictions into the EULA everytime a service pack comes out? Oh, and then there's the outrageous pricing model on Windows. It gets more expensive every year. Finally, there's the "if you want security, you're gonna have to pay for it" attidute they've recently developed. First, they seed the market with some of the mosdt insecure shit software ever to see the business side of a CD, then, they wait for everyone to bitch and moan about how all software is so insecure, ending with a big push on security and saying, "Well, we can make it more secure, but someone's gonna have to foot the bill, and it won't be us (Microsoft)". Yeah, I think he put it pretty close to the mark. Microsoft sucks. FWIW, I ignore the aimless rantings on both sides of the issue. I use Linux because (among other reasons) I am tired of Microsoft wanting to dictate to me how and when I should use my own hardware and software. ------- signature starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- signature ends
-
Matt Newman wrote: He doesn't really have anything to back up his "Microsoft sucks" argument. He doesn't? How about XP? Even better, how about Palladium or Passport? What about Microsoft's "Media PC that was going to restrict use of things that were recorded on it? How about MS trying to shuffle new and tougher restrictions into the EULA everytime a service pack comes out? Oh, and then there's the outrageous pricing model on Windows. It gets more expensive every year. Finally, there's the "if you want security, you're gonna have to pay for it" attidute they've recently developed. First, they seed the market with some of the mosdt insecure shit software ever to see the business side of a CD, then, they wait for everyone to bitch and moan about how all software is so insecure, ending with a big push on security and saying, "Well, we can make it more secure, but someone's gonna have to foot the bill, and it won't be us (Microsoft)". Yeah, I think he put it pretty close to the mark. Microsoft sucks. FWIW, I ignore the aimless rantings on both sides of the issue. I use Linux because (among other reasons) I am tired of Microsoft wanting to dictate to me how and when I should use my own hardware and software. ------- signature starts "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 Please review the Legal Disclaimer in my bio. ------- signature ends
Your remarks pretty much illustrate what he was talking about. I, and a lot of other people, want Passport and Palladium (which is widely misunderstood, BTW.) The Media intellectual protection issues are still alive and until resolved, the big media outlets aren't going to go for internet distribution. Windows doesn't get more expensive every year. In fact, for bundled versions (how most people get it) it's been the same price for five years. I paid about $90 for my Windows 98SE upgrade, the XP Home upgrade is, wow, $96 on buy.com. Big increase. (I also paid $220 for my Windows 2000 upgrade on a second machine the day it came out. XP Pro upgrade is $185. Hold it, that's a drop!) The EULA controversy is invented. Have you ever actually read it? Have you read the EULA for other software? Microsoft's is industry standard. (Since Linux is so great, how about the great GPL which some developers tweak to require you to open all your source if you use their code.) Security: Windows can be more secure than Linux. In the past, due to criticisms of the popular press, Microsoft made a mistake of favoring ease of use over enabling all the security features. If you examine the actual tracking of security and bug issues, Microsoft usuallly comes out about the same as Solaris and both are way ahead of Linux. In the past month, Linux has been hit by two severe Worms/Virii. The infection was extremely rapid, most likely because lazy-ass administrators fooled themselves into thinking their Linux servers were secure and didn't have to pay attention to them. (Every corporate infection I've personally been affected by was due to the same reason--laziness.) (Look at the publicity surrounding BugBear. It's actually a more benign worm than the Linux issues, yet it has magnitudes more publicity. Makes sense because Windows has over 90% market share.) John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: if you want security, you're gonna have to pay for it Huh? What about the Linux scalability issues? That there are known problems with the kernel under high stress. How about the way Linus okays a minor release because it's just time for one? What makes Linux superior to FreeBSD, Darwin (Mac) and Solaris, amongst other flavors of UNIX? John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I am tired of Microsoft wanting to dictate to me how and when I should use my own hardware and software. Hahahahahahah. That was a funny line. Linux's pathetic support for hardware doesn't ha
-
Your remarks pretty much illustrate what he was talking about. I, and a lot of other people, want Passport and Palladium (which is widely misunderstood, BTW.) The Media intellectual protection issues are still alive and until resolved, the big media outlets aren't going to go for internet distribution. Windows doesn't get more expensive every year. In fact, for bundled versions (how most people get it) it's been the same price for five years. I paid about $90 for my Windows 98SE upgrade, the XP Home upgrade is, wow, $96 on buy.com. Big increase. (I also paid $220 for my Windows 2000 upgrade on a second machine the day it came out. XP Pro upgrade is $185. Hold it, that's a drop!) The EULA controversy is invented. Have you ever actually read it? Have you read the EULA for other software? Microsoft's is industry standard. (Since Linux is so great, how about the great GPL which some developers tweak to require you to open all your source if you use their code.) Security: Windows can be more secure than Linux. In the past, due to criticisms of the popular press, Microsoft made a mistake of favoring ease of use over enabling all the security features. If you examine the actual tracking of security and bug issues, Microsoft usuallly comes out about the same as Solaris and both are way ahead of Linux. In the past month, Linux has been hit by two severe Worms/Virii. The infection was extremely rapid, most likely because lazy-ass administrators fooled themselves into thinking their Linux servers were secure and didn't have to pay attention to them. (Every corporate infection I've personally been affected by was due to the same reason--laziness.) (Look at the publicity surrounding BugBear. It's actually a more benign worm than the Linux issues, yet it has magnitudes more publicity. Makes sense because Windows has over 90% market share.) John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: if you want security, you're gonna have to pay for it Huh? What about the Linux scalability issues? That there are known problems with the kernel under high stress. How about the way Linus okays a minor release because it's just time for one? What makes Linux superior to FreeBSD, Darwin (Mac) and Solaris, amongst other flavors of UNIX? John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: I am tired of Microsoft wanting to dictate to me how and when I should use my own hardware and software. Hahahahahahah. That was a funny line. Linux's pathetic support for hardware doesn't ha
Joe Woodbury wrote: I, and a lot of other people, want Passport and Palladium why? how sure are you that independent software developers are going to be able to get their programs signed? Joe Woodbury wrote: Linux's pathetic support for hardware when was the last time you tried installing Linux ? i installed RH 8 last week and it was as simple as any Windows installation i've ever done. it found everything my 6 year old gateway p-180 had, inlcuding the no-name $35 CD-ROM drive. Joe Woodbury wrote: because lazy-ass administrators fooled themselves into thinking their Linux servers were secure and this never happens to Windows, right. i still get two or three Klez emails every day. Joe Woodbury wrote: Since Linux is so great, how about the great GPL which some developers tweak to require you to open all your source if you use their code i'm not sure that's even a sentence... but, if you don't like the GPL, don't write GPL'd software - is that too difficult? -c
Support regime change. Vote.
-
My neighbor is a linux user, now I have nothing against linux users or linux. However when there only reason for linux being better is "Windows sucks" or "Microsoft sucks" it gets really damn annoying. He doesn't really have anything to back up his "Microsoft sucks" argument. I also find it ironic that he seems to have an "infinite knowledge" (or so he thinks) of how Windows works even though he hasn't by his own admission used Windows since the early days of Windows 98. He also tried convincing me that the XP EULA said that gave Microsoft unrestricted access to your computer even on the hardware level :wtf:, which by the way isn't in there. In fact I quoted several sections of the EULA and he didn't recognize any of it and even accuesed me of lying about it. Does anyone else have to put up with this type of people on a regular basis? -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John Simmonsyou actually read the EULA :omg: and you were able to quote from it! :eek:
1001111111011101111100111100101011110011110100101110010011010010
Sonork | 100.21142 | TheEclypse -
Joe Woodbury wrote: I, and a lot of other people, want Passport and Palladium why? how sure are you that independent software developers are going to be able to get their programs signed? Joe Woodbury wrote: Linux's pathetic support for hardware when was the last time you tried installing Linux ? i installed RH 8 last week and it was as simple as any Windows installation i've ever done. it found everything my 6 year old gateway p-180 had, inlcuding the no-name $35 CD-ROM drive. Joe Woodbury wrote: because lazy-ass administrators fooled themselves into thinking their Linux servers were secure and this never happens to Windows, right. i still get two or three Klez emails every day. Joe Woodbury wrote: Since Linux is so great, how about the great GPL which some developers tweak to require you to open all your source if you use their code i'm not sure that's even a sentence... but, if you don't like the GPL, don't write GPL'd software - is that too difficult? -c
Support regime change. Vote.
Please note, I tried to inject sarcasm throughout, though apparently failed. Chris Losinger wrote: Joe Woodbury wrote: I, and a lot of other people, want Passport and Palladium why? how sure are you that independent software developers are going to be able to get their programs signed? The concept of not having to remember dozens of usernames and passwords (I keep a list on sheet of paper next to my computer and on a floppy and still miss a few--just yesterday I wasn't able to log into a site because I couldn't remember which username and password I used. I tried all sorts of iterations and finally gave up.) Palladium is a framework for more secure computing. What I don't understand is the argument that it shouldn't be done because some developers theoretically may have problems. So we get over those problems, but isn't the goal to have more secure communication? (And if the marketplace doesn't want it, it won't happen. Don't bother making a factuous argument about Microsoft marketing. Microsoft has had it's share of failures, some of them quite costly.) Chris Losinger wrote: Joe Woodbury wrote: Linux's pathetic support for hardware when was the last time you tried installing Linux ? i installed RH 8 last week and it was as simple as any Windows installation i've ever done. it found everything my 6 year old gateway p-180 had, inlcuding the no-name $35 CD-ROM drive. Alas, another failed attempt at sarcasm. I hang my head in shame. The hardware support for Windows is far bigger than that for Linux, thus Linux support is pathetic (i.e. arousing sympathetic sadness or compassion) by comparison. In the larger context of the paragraph, I was mocking the claim that Microsoft has some how "dictate"ing a narrow set of constraints on Window's users when, in fact, the are more hardware and software options available for Windows than Linux, your install not withstanding. (Actually, when it comes to limiting choices, Apple pops into mind.) Chris Losinger wrote: Joe Woodbury wrote: because lazy-ass administrators fooled themselves into thinking their Linux servers were secure and this never happens to Windows, right. i still get two or three Klez emails every day. Read on and you'll note that I state that clearly. The infections I've had to deal at my previous company with were ALL due to laziness on the part of administrators regardless of the OS. Chris Losinger wrote: J
-
My neighbor is a linux user, now I have nothing against linux users or linux. However when there only reason for linux being better is "Windows sucks" or "Microsoft sucks" it gets really damn annoying. He doesn't really have anything to back up his "Microsoft sucks" argument. I also find it ironic that he seems to have an "infinite knowledge" (or so he thinks) of how Windows works even though he hasn't by his own admission used Windows since the early days of Windows 98. He also tried convincing me that the XP EULA said that gave Microsoft unrestricted access to your computer even on the hardware level :wtf:, which by the way isn't in there. In fact I quoted several sections of the EULA and he didn't recognize any of it and even accuesed me of lying about it. Does anyone else have to put up with this type of people on a regular basis? -:suss:Matt Newman / Windows XP Activist:suss: -Sonork ID: 100.11179
"You can't seriously believe that you could get away with suing someone over quoting text from a message posted in a public forum, can you?" - John SimmonsUsed to, in my operating systems class. The subject matter centered on Linux since we could analyze the source code. However, every now and then the prof would say "... but Windows does it like this..." Without fail, *every* time the prof mentioned Windows, this kid that sat next to me would audibly say, "Windows sucks!" He just had a blind hatred for Microsoft. Someday his little fantasy world and the real world will collide, and I have a feeling that he won't emerge unscathed. Jon Sagara Help me out here, Spock. I don't speak stupid.
-
Please note, I tried to inject sarcasm throughout, though apparently failed. Chris Losinger wrote: Joe Woodbury wrote: I, and a lot of other people, want Passport and Palladium why? how sure are you that independent software developers are going to be able to get their programs signed? The concept of not having to remember dozens of usernames and passwords (I keep a list on sheet of paper next to my computer and on a floppy and still miss a few--just yesterday I wasn't able to log into a site because I couldn't remember which username and password I used. I tried all sorts of iterations and finally gave up.) Palladium is a framework for more secure computing. What I don't understand is the argument that it shouldn't be done because some developers theoretically may have problems. So we get over those problems, but isn't the goal to have more secure communication? (And if the marketplace doesn't want it, it won't happen. Don't bother making a factuous argument about Microsoft marketing. Microsoft has had it's share of failures, some of them quite costly.) Chris Losinger wrote: Joe Woodbury wrote: Linux's pathetic support for hardware when was the last time you tried installing Linux ? i installed RH 8 last week and it was as simple as any Windows installation i've ever done. it found everything my 6 year old gateway p-180 had, inlcuding the no-name $35 CD-ROM drive. Alas, another failed attempt at sarcasm. I hang my head in shame. The hardware support for Windows is far bigger than that for Linux, thus Linux support is pathetic (i.e. arousing sympathetic sadness or compassion) by comparison. In the larger context of the paragraph, I was mocking the claim that Microsoft has some how "dictate"ing a narrow set of constraints on Window's users when, in fact, the are more hardware and software options available for Windows than Linux, your install not withstanding. (Actually, when it comes to limiting choices, Apple pops into mind.) Chris Losinger wrote: Joe Woodbury wrote: because lazy-ass administrators fooled themselves into thinking their Linux servers were secure and this never happens to Windows, right. i still get two or three Klez emails every day. Read on and you'll note that I state that clearly. The infections I've had to deal at my previous company with were ALL due to laziness on the part of administrators regardless of the OS. Chris Losinger wrote: J
Joe Woodbury wrote: My point was that if one is going to complain about imagined offenses in Microsoft's EULA, they should read the GPL, which is far more honerous but they describe two completely unrelated things. MS's EULA describes how you can use Windows (and the fact that you can't publish benchmarks, etc). the GPL limits what you can do with the uncompiled source code that you are given - it says nothing about how you can use that software. one is a copyright issue, the other is a one-sided contract. i use windows because it makes more financial sense, and i'm used to the interface. but, as others have said before on CP, it wouldn't take much for me to jump ship. -c
Support regime change. Vote.
