D&C GLug - Home Page

[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]

Re: [LUG] (Another rant) [Fwd: Microsoft shuts down Windows 98]

 

Theo Zourzouvillys wrote:
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 22:13, Tom Potts wrote:

  
What you do not do is give large quantities of money to a company that
makes the same mistakes over and over again - probably deliberately so
mugs will upgrade.
        
Out of interest, which "same mistakes" do you refer to?
      
Apart from writing appalling software? 
    

OS + developer tools aside, i see MS Office (+Visio etc), IE, BizTalk, 
Exchange, MS Money, SQL Server, and some games as their "main" products.  for 
some reason, i can't seem to think of any others (MS Works + Encarta maybe, 
hehehe).

MS office is in *MY* view, an excellent product.  I'm sure millions of other 
people around the world would agree with me.  It's certinaly a lot faster 
than OOo on the same hardware, and has the equivalent set of features, not to 
mention that visio has nothing open source that even comes close to it yet.

IE 6 is also a very fast (infact, magnitudes faster than it's only other 
competitor at the time of release) at rendering. [queue netscape zealots ...]

BizTalk i've never used so could not comment on.

Exchange is good for the job it was designed to do, although i'd argue that 
exim + cyrus probably does the job better - unless you have an IT support guy 
(or none at all) that does not know linux.  However, i see nothing *wrong* 
with Exchange.

Althouh i prefer quickbooks over MS Money, i know a lot of people who prefer 
it to quickbooks - so again, couldn't class it as "appalling".

MSSQL seems fine - it's in the leauge of oracle + postgres.  again, certianly 
not "appalling" - although not my cup of tsai.

If you are discussing operating system itsefl, rather than product, then i 
think you need tell me which *version* you are refering to: each have had 
different characteristics.  None of which i would call "appaling" for the 
time they were released when compared to their competitors, other than maybe 
ME :-)

  
Apart from trying to pretend computers are easier than they are?
    

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here?

  
Ever heard of buffer overflow? 
They cant have had more that a few hundred thousand of those crop up in each 
    
new OS.

you need to be far, far more exact.  

Are you talking about windows as a server or desktop? Which version? local or 
remote ones, or both?

Show me kernel domain buffer overflows.  I'll probably be able to match you 
with the same number of linux ones.

now if you're talking about buffer overflows (which by the way, is not the 
only form of security risk) in libraries, then thats' a completely different 
story, and one that can not in any way be fairly measured for either parties.

Other way, they're in the dozens, not "hundreds of thousands".  which, by the 
way, a GNU desktop probably is, too.

  
 If I sold you a car without brakes because that was more user friendly
you'd have me in court tomorrow - you'd at least get your money back on the
argument that 'the product was not fit for purpose' let alone downright
dangerous. 
    

see my previous post - i agree entirely.  But this has absolutely zero to do 
with Microsoft's products, as they have ALL been fit for their purpose at 
time of sale IMO.

  
Sell me a computer that connects to the net without any security 
- other than that offered to Microsoft in the product license knowing it
could get compromised is theft! 
Microsoft could have put in a firewall on 
all products from w95 onwards at practically zero cost, but then they
couldn't have charged thousands for their server software. I
    

Do you know what the percentage of the worlds population used the internet in 
98, compared to today? ~3%. Today it's around ~16% - although higher in 
developed countries obviously.  I remember back in 98.  Next to no viruses, 
or spam, and certainly not the organised internet crime we're seeing on a day 
to day basis today. so why was the product unsuitable for it's purpose? there 
was no real risk to computers connected to the inter back then (which was 
normally for brief periods of time anyway, not 24/7 like today).

Windows 95 didn't even have a built in TCP/IP stack!

so .. fast forward a few years to when security did START to become an issue 
on the net, and you have win2k.  guess what? 2k did have a firewall, just not 
turned on my default [2].

Fast forward to when it really started to become a major issue, and, ohh, 
look, XP has a firewall, and ohh my! it's turned on my default! shocking.

  
Its only public
humiliation that has forced them to sell a locked down piece of software.
    

Err, install redhat 6.0 and leave it on the net.  see how long it takes to 
get 'splioted.  does that mean the same thing for redhat?

So far you've given me:

 * Apart from writing appalling software? 
 * Apart from trying to pretend computers are easier than they are?
 * Ever heard of buffer overflow? 

... none of which are mistakes they've made "time and time again".  so yes, 
apart from all of these.

So again, i'll ask:

 Out of interest, which "same mistakes" do you refer to?

because unless you have anything better that what you've given me so far, 
please, stop the damn Microsoft bashing unless you have a REAL technical or 
usability argument - You do not appear (so far) to have a clue what you are 
talking about, just uninformed accusations that have no grounding.

Besides, this a a LUG, not a MBG.

Maybe instead of focusing all of your energy on bashing microsoft, you could 
instead focus on something more constructive like looking at the features 
Vista, IE7, .NET, and Office has that open source products do not have, and 
do the things that need doing to add them as features requests at the right 
project. For example, automatically adding route weights based upon interface 
speeds as mentioned in a previous post today.

Because while you're in your little hole preaching about how amazingly rubbish 
[3] Microsoft's products are (and, of course, the obligatory "Microsoft are 
SOOOO evil" .. make sure you get that SOOOO bit right, just like Vicky 
Polard - sounds much more amusing), they're busy finalising their next 
generation of products to blow OSS out of it's way for desktop (and possibly 
even server) users.  oops.

 ~ Theo

1 - That doesn't mean it's bad, right?
2 - first mistake i've seen so far.
3 - i'm being gentle with the language

  
re mssql - I have a fully up to date development version - I have to keep it switched off as it has the slammer virus - the fix offered is to  'upgrade'! that's OK cos I can run any number of OS databases - even thought they don't integrate with Visual Studio - the one decent product Microsoft have. But that's probably because its based around .NET which is also fantastic - but that's probably because its  an open standard - something Microsoft try and avoid. And even with that I'd have to upgrade to Server status for a couple of facilities that would be useful.
MSExchange - you obviously haven't had to support it in a real environment. I had to spend 3 weeks continuously assisting 3 £500 a day MCSE engineers attempt to fix our Exchange 5 set-up that had gone pear shaped when the database became corrupted. They gave up recommending full reinstall - loosing some 2Gig of messages and details of 5000 users. I wrote a few simple bits to crack and fix the database and had it working in two days. That would probably be illegal today! And I could read every message ever sent - secure - NOT! £50000 pounds of software and servers and licences and support that could have been replaced by any number of free solutions but microsoft lied and said it was a working product. It might be now but at what cost to the users?
    Office is a great product - well maybe if you don't know any better. I don't live in little hole preaching - I have 32 years computing experience. If you want to cripple your organisation using office go ahead. I wouldn't use MS office or Open Office for that matter if I wanted my organisation to USE computers and not pointlessly imitate paper. Follow the herd into that wilderness if you must but when you finally realise that fourteen thousand fonts and formats does not make the data in that document any more computer friendly you too will realise you've been sold a pup. It was another corporate evil Sun that wrote most of Open Office in hatred for M$ - if they'd hadn't wasted their time with that a written a web based version we'd all be a lot better off. No, not a lot, a massive amount!

    Have a read of  'A computer called Leo' . Then ask yourself how most organisations today who use a million times more computing power per desk are more poorly integrated than a company using one valve computer was in the early 1960's. Because M$ have been telling them that their product is good for them. Alas too many people do not realise that all that glisters is not gold and have bought all the pretty bells and whistles without looking at the bottom line. Schools teach microsoft word processing and how to produce bloated HTML documents from the same. Computing, however, is 'data with semantics' not 'data with formatting'. We have a whole generation of people under the illusion that 1+1=4 is fine so long as you use the corporate style manual and can segue it from blue to red in powerpoint.

I've watched computing hurtle forwards until the early nineties when, to my mind, M$ deliberately tried to stifle the internet but fortunately it was too resilient. Since then its moved like treacle. Mainly because Microsoft have abused their monopoly position and tried to shut out all competition. 

Microsoft may not be evil but if they're not they're either in denial or criminally ignorant. They have sold the idea that computing is easy - that's their big lie. Its not and your going to have to live with that and learn how to safely, securely and efficiently manipulate data - not its appearance! Microsoft don't appear to have the tools for this thought they do have some tools that will allow you to do some pretty things. To my mind usability  is about what a product does for me and not how easy it is for me to do the wrong thing. Having to 'upgrade' all my software every now and then is not usable. The 486 with RH6.1 that allowed me to browse the web, and acted as a firewall for 6 years and was NEVER compromised is usable - or it was until I found I couldn't fit it in my new house!

Emo Phillips had a wonderful sketch about how there was a special door in his house that he was not allowed through. When he got to eighteen his dad finally opened the door. Through that door he saw amazing things  he'd never dreamed of: like the sky, birds, trees and other people.
Microsoft is that closed door. MCSE is the padlock on that door. Kick it down.

Tom te tom te tom.
-- 
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html