Re: Anti-MS drivel

[Miguel Mendez <flynn () energyhq es eu org>]

James Patterson Wicks wrote:

> Microsoft has competition.  Apple, Sun, Red Hat . . .

It sure does, but not on the x86 desktop.

> Problem is Apple is full of idiots who feature style over substance.
> The system has to look better than it performs.  They want people to pay
> a premium to make it seem that their products are for the elite only.
> The OS is more stable than Microsoft, but their elitist attitude will
> always keep them at 5% market share.

James, I don't know how old you are, or if you're just dim. Apple 
employs extremely talented people. Or do you think they just grabbed 
Mach and FreeBSD and threw out an OS without testing and engineering? 
They have people like Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith working hard on the 
BSD side of things. They have extremely good people working on the UI 
side of things. Add to that the NeXT heritage and what you get is the 
finest desktop OS ever made, combined with the robustnes typically found 
in *ix systems. And cut the expensive hardware crap, that was true 10 
years ago, not now. You can get a very nice Mac for a decent price these 
days. The fact is, OS X has had far less security problems than any 
desktop OS Microsoft has ever made.

> Sun's Java should be the market leader, but they don't have the cash to
> take on the 800 pound gorilla that is Microsoft.  Java is on running
> Spirit, the rover that is on Mars right now.  Imagine if Spirit had a

Again, you don't know what you're talking about. Java has its place in 
the server, that's where it shines. Nobody uses java for desktop apps 
except when you want easy multi-platform support, and even then, there 
are other alternatives. Java is very strong in the middleware market, 
where it shows all its true potential.

> Sorry, but the guy from the Help Desk can't just stop by and reboot it
> this time.  Even NASA is not crazy enough to trust a billion dollar
> project to a Microsoft OS.

Last time I checked Java was not an operating system.

> Linux is just not ready for prime time.  By prime time I mean on the
> homes of the American public.  Regular home consumers don't want to have
> to learn a new language to use e-mail or play games.  They want to be
> able to update a security hole without having to compile something.
> Linux needs an interface like OS X and a software library to back it for
> "normal" people to be interested.  

Perhaps Microsoft's contracts with the major vendors also have something 
to do with this. OTOH, I do think there are Joe ComputerUser-ready linux 
distros. For people who use their computer to check e-mail, write some 
letters and browse the web, that is. I don't think a Mandrake or Knoppix 
system is that hard to learn. I'll give you the games thing, though. 
It's a catch-22 situation. The Linux market is too small, so little 
games are available, but few gamers will switch too linux if no games 
are available.

> Business on the other hand is moving slowly to Linux.  Why slowly?  Who
> do you sue when your business is hacked by someone who planted a
> backdoor in the Linux kernel?  Won't happen you say?  Let's see, almost
> happened once already . . . 

You are so wrong. Businesses tend to be very conservative. If it works, 
don't touch it. That's why there are still IBM mainframes, that's why 
there are thousands of COBOL apps still running. Get a support contract 
with RedHat or SuSe. When a new worm comes out that infects your whole 
Windows network because some guy brought his laptop and bypassed your 
firewall, do you sue Microsoft?

> Linux kernel suffers Trojan horse hack -
> http://www.silicon.com/software/os/0,39024651,39116796,00.htm

Guess what, no operating system is perfectly bugfree.

Cheers,
--
        Miguel Mendez <flynn () energyhq es eu org>
        http://www.energyhq.es.eu.org
        PGP Key: 0xDC8514F1

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html