In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Wed, 06 Dec 2006 16:47:33 +0000
<3879082.MaO53pLRLD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> __/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Wednesday 06 December 2006 15:40 \__
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Sinister Midget
>> <phydeaux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote
>> on Wed, 06 Dec 2006 14:58:42 GMT
>> <qd2j44-7n1.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> On 2006-12-06, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted
>>> something concerning:
>>>> Unbreakable Linux still unproven, analyst warns
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>| IT managers running Red Hat Linux should think carefully before
>>>>| making the switch to Unbreakable Linux, the new Linux distribution
>>>>| that Oracle Corp. announced last month.
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>>
> http://searchopensource.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid39_gci1233083,00.html
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/twor8
>>>>
>>>> Less reason for Red Hat to worry.
>>>
>>> It was a stupid name anyway.
>>>
>>> However, linux can't be proven to be unbreakable, while Windows is
>>> known to be broken in dozens of ways. So everybody should do the right
>>> thing by using the proven product, Windows.
>>>
>>
>> Of course. What's good for Microsoft is good for the country.
>
>
> Which one?
The one which General Motors used to inhabit long ago, I think. :-)
>
>
>> (Now where have I heard that before....? :-) )
>
>
> Too bad all that stash is in Ireland and Microsoft pays no divident, eh? Too
> bad the wealth goes to {a chosen few}^tm, all at the expense of a diverse
> industry that employs more people.
>
> Too bad...
>
> Microsoft.
>
> Too bad.
>
Yeppers...but I think Microsoft has done a wonderful job
of shooting itself in the foot lately, and I think the
buying public is getting a little clued in as to how bad
the situation is. They may not quite know the remedy yet
(though Linux is out there), but that'll be resolved in
time, especially if Linux continues its excellent security
reputation (troll reports of the occasional malware "bug"
notwithstanding) and Microsoft doesn't totally botch it up
with some variant of Trusted Computing Lock-In(tm).
And I'll give some kudos to Dell for at least acquiescing
to the demand for non-Microsoft desktops, although the
way they're doing it is a little strange from a totally
competitive viewpoint. But baby steps are better than
none at all, and there are some issues regarding economies
of scale that make Intel, AMD, *and Microsoft* far better
desktop buys than other chips and software nowadays, at
least until Intel and AMD shoot *themselves* in the foot by
adding a capability nobody wants (such as DRM) and plummet
as a result. However, ideally we'd have a diverse mixture
of desktops and systems by now -- while not things such as
the 6502, 1802, 680x, and 2650 (since those are ancient
-- though still useful in industrial applications where
reliability is more important than controller speed),
they *would* be a mix, and that mix would have been a
natural inoculate against the stupid malware (most of it
being brain-dead) wasting bandwidth now.
On a more general front, I'm not sure what to make of money
and the economy generally. If one models money as water it
all sinks into the ground (except for those who are lucky
enough to build water fountains for the raindrops, I suppose;
it's not a perfect analogy).
"In the year 2306, data is money". So it came a little earlier
than the makers of Delta-V anticipated. :-)
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Q: "Why is my computer doing that?"
A: "Don't do that and you'll be fine."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
