Re: Remote hole in OpenBSD 4.1

[George Capehart <gwc () acm org>]

Michael Smythe wrote:

<snip>

> What I find most appalling about all of this is when I read Kuro5hin this
> morning I saw this post come up:
> http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/8/2/15233/84896
>
> And when I checked back later this afternoon, Theo had actually replied,
> heatedly. A few things in his response also don't lend him any credibility.

<snip>

pot, kettle, black.

I read the kuro5hin URL and I didn't feel the "heatedly" part.

Caveats:

 - Yes, TdR can be a bit over the top sometimes.
 - I know nothing about OpenBSD's relationship with AMD or Intel.  I
only have TdR's comments on the Kuro5hin page to go on.
 - I could care less about OpenBSD's relationship with AMD or Intel.

However, I /*do*/ have an unflattering opinion of Intel.  IMHO, they're
worse than M$ when it comes to initmidating first-line customers (read
OEMs) and abusing their position in the market.  Google Intel +
anti-trust for starters.  I don't see that their technology is any
better than AMD's and, in most cases, it's playing catch-up.  Goes way
back to the 808x days when cycle-for-cycle, the Z80 beat the pants off
the 8080.  Then there's also the Itanic debacle with HP.  It's /*still*/
 IMHO not competitive with the DEC AXP platform ca 1990 and the HPPA
architecture.

So, my take on all this is "Give me a break!"  Intel is a bully and a
technology second-rate.  But they do have deep pockets and they /*are*/
willing to browbeat their best customers.

Mt 0.02$CURRENCY.

/g


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/