Bill Gates arrested in his younger days (photo in public domain)

ICROSOFT are finally starting to investigate zombie attacks, which have been launched continuously due to vulnerability in their flagship product — the ubiquitous operating system Windows. This is long overdue and a real embarrassment as the extent of zombie attacks is growingrapidly. Not only do Windows users suffer as a result of these attacks, but the entire Web does, me included. From the article:

Microsoft is investigating 13 spam operations as part of a call to action against zombies, which are compromised computers used without their owners’ permission to send spam, launch denial-of-service (DoS) attacks, and spread worms and viruses.

Ironically enough, Microsoft attempted to fix this loophole, but did so incompletely! Their patch was flawed. So, for the past 3 weeks, my site has come under attack by over 1,000 Windows zombies per day (never less than 1,000). At some point, the strain was so high that the site and Web host reached the brink of collapse. This could only be described as Denial of Service (DoS) attack, almost leading to my site being Dead on Arrival (DoA). This has been costing me money, as well as plenty of time and distress.

I explicitly promised to mention this aspect of my activities no more. Yet, the 2 articles above sparked my emotions yet again (and Halloween is a couple of days ahead, so zombies are on topic). Why should my pocket be emptied to cover for junk traffic that is spewed out from unprotected operating systems, which were claimed to be strong and and reliable? Why is it that Webmasters are no longer in control over their own Web sites? Those affected would know exactly what I mean.

A lot of my bandwidth gets drained by zombies from all around the world. Consequently, the server slows down and log files become extremely noisy. Spammer-driven zombies are intended to ruin these logs. The effort is affordable as merely any hijacked computer can be exploited to attain brute-force attacks. The only solution is operating system cleansing. While Microsoft attempt to hunt down the spammers/attackers, I think they ought to be responsible for patch up any vulnerable machine. This includes any Internet Café where the owners are simply apathetic to critical patches.

My final message to Microsoft: You got the Internet into this mess to begin with. You made your operating system so easy to penetrate/hijack and the entire world (or a subset of it) suffers. You are now responsible for putting an end to it all and you sure have enough money to put into the necessary operations. I am tempted to use strong language, but I suppose it would be inappropriate at this time and place and would achieve nothing.

I once addressed Windows users with a friendly message on the need to patch up the operating system. If the users are unwilling to do so or find it rather difficult, Microsoft ought to step up and get involved. Otherwise, the Net would soon degrade to a sordid mess involving more and more DoS attacks. Fingers would all be pointing at Redmond and the reputation of Windows, as if it ever existed, be shattered.

Windows XP in AJAX

An article from CNN, which as expected does not descend to technicalities, explains why Web-based applications put Windows and Microsoft Office under realistic threat.

NEW YORK (AP) — A quiet revolution is transforming life on the Internet: New, agile software now lets people quickly check flight options, see stock prices fluctuate and better manage their online photos and e-mail.

Such tools make computing less of a chore because they sit on distant Web servers and run over standard browsers. Users thus don’t have to worry about installing software or moving data when they switch computers.

And that could bode ill for Microsoft Corp. and its flagship Office suite, which packs together word processing, spreadsheets and other applications.

The threat comes in large part from Ajax, a set of Web development tools that speeds up Web applications by summoning snippets of data as needed instead of pulling entire Web pages over and over.

I am pleased to have discovered that Google encourage and support Open Source in American schools. Apart from the fruit of Summer of Code, Google have just decided to fund Open Source projects in a state where students are urged to adhere to ‘free as in freedom’.

I believe it is likely that we shall see more of the same. Expansion of the Open Source ‘realm’ directly hurts Google’s main rival, which is Microsoft. It devalues the commercial equivalents and pushes down the cost.

School is a fantastic place to learn, but what if you could introduce students to open source projects, with real problems to solve, and fantastic developers to work with? We thought that would be a pretty terrific way of spending the summer, and with the help of 40 open source, free software and technology-related groups, that is exactly what we did. We call this project the Summer of Code.

…

Now that summer is over, we’ve got a new thing going. Today at the Oregon Governor’s office in Salem, we’re announcing our support of an open source initiative which two men, Bart Massey and Scott Kveton, at two schools, Oregon State University and Portland State University, have worked very hard to create. Over the last few years, they have collaborated to encourage open source software and hardware development, develop academic curricula and provide computing infrastructure to open source projects worldwide. We’re pleased to be able to support their efforts with a donation of $350,000.

The item, by the way, was written by Google’s Code Manager, with whom I raised my concerns over Linux negligence in the past. This item proves that Google have truer intentions of giving back to the very same community they stem from. Summer of Code was apparently just the beginning of something bigger. In fact, as Google rely on many Open Source projects like Apache, they are able to use their financial strengths to improve code and return it to the community.

There is more on this story in Oregon’s news.

Related items:

• Google Make Media Player Inter-operable
• Sun-Google Pact
• Google OS – What if?

Windows XP slows down as time goes on due to patches, protective software, and Registry bloat

INDOWS Vista was already said to be a trainwreck, primarily due to its inability to deliver something innovative. It gives no compelling reason whatsoever for users to upgrade. People who have had the chance to fiddle with the Vista beta build can confirm this. In fact, it seems to be lagging behind other operating systems, notably Mac OS X as was previously confesses by a Microsoft evangelist.

On top of it all, hardware requirements of Windows Vista make it rather unappealing. Novell have said that Vista will drive away Windows users and ultimately lead them to Linux. To many, adopting Windows Vista probably means acquisition of a new computer, which will most probably contain Windows pre-installed for a variety of reasons that involve anti-fair trade practices.

Windows XP was first introduced to the public in late 2001 and, as we approach the end of 2005, Windows XP is worse than ever before. The many critical patches, which came in the form of Service Pack I & II have made it slower and less likely to interact with all underlying modules gracefully. With more Windows viruses in the wild, it requires more attention and maintenance than before, which has definitely led to unrest among its users community. In the mean time, Apple’s Tiger has been gaining strength and has even surpassed, in term of it functionality, the Microsoft equivalents — something that even Microsoft could not truly deny. KDE, in the mean time, has been growing very rapidly and it is now comparable with any other desktop layers and often surpasses the competition in terms of its functionality. See, for instance:

• KDE Plasma
• State-of-the-art Linux Screenshots
• Next Generation of X

It is also worth mentioning Ubuntu Linux, which has done tremendously well at easing a transition to a free operating system. Hewlett Packard have recently started selling Ubuntu desktops and laptops, as a matter of fact. Ubuntu comes in just a single CD, its hardware detection is admirable, and moreover it is stable and user-friendly. Its bundled Live CD makes another big pro as users who are too resistant to delete Windows can have a period of adaptation and gain some re-assurance with regards to their platform migration.

Bill Gates arrested in his younger days (photo in public domain)

OHN H. Terpstra, a bold IT consultant, explains in an excellent article, which comes in 3 parts, how Microsoft and its disguised allies are working as a group toward abolishment of Linux on the desktop. The article presents a made-up case study and explains how some Linux incompatibilities are to be blamed for at a higher level.

Joe felt that Airgo Networks should be commended for its honorable handling of OSS, but he still had no luck there. When he called the company, he found out that no Linux drivers will be available for the Airgo chip set until late 2005 or early 2006.

The author also mentions the issue of cost, which is apparently well-controlled from up above, or contrariwise from down below, i.e. under the table.

Joe figured that since Linux is free, the cost of a laptop computer pre-loaded with Linux would cost less than one that shipped with Microsoft Windows. Wrong! The cost estimates he came up with were between $300 and $500 more for a system with Linux than for one with Windows.

Joe did a Google search to find Linux on laptop suppliers and obtained five price offers. Many Windows laptop specials offered a free bundled LCD monitor or a free bundled printer. No such offer was found for a Linux pre-loaded laptop.

It is worth referring back to an item that illustrates that fact. Dell Computers are selling an open PC (i.e. no operating system = bland hard-drive) for more than a computer with Windows pre-installed. Microsoft is apparently subsidising hardware or relishes on illegal kickbacks.

In John’s article he tends to become more political towards the end.

Joe had to pay for Microsoft Windows when he had no desire to use it, because he would have paid more for a machine without it. Why should consumers suffer cost increases to use a free operating system? Why are governments around the world so silent on this matter? Isn’t it time for the consumer to be better informed of the graft and corruption in the IT retail industry?

I, for once, could not agree more.

PDF‘s, text files, HTML‘s and
directories in the KDE Desktop with previews (click to enlarge)

ERTAIN issues arise when habits and user orientation in his/her desktop are interfered with. Desktop environments, installers, filesystem structures, or even platforms in general are often more workable and thus successful if they comply with the expectation of new users. What if these are made too stringent by the developers, however? What if decisions and conventions are voted for without involvement of the end-user?

Many desktop environments, free ones in particular, are not made uniform. The resulting diversity and flexibility leads to difficulties in using somebody else’s settings, i.e. working in conjunction under the same session. Some GNU/Linux distributions include more or less any desktop environment which exists while settings are kept apart and well-separable for each user of the system and each desktop environment. So, where does the the problem lie? Give users more freedom, I suggest, and make that the norm. It is, after all, their own computer and they understand their needs better than the developers of the operating system.

What appears worse than all is the scenario where decisions are arrogantly by the vendor and then enforced. This is often the path that operating systems such as Mac O/S (to its varieties) and Windows do. Give the user some more choice, I say, by adding options for endless customisation that has very few boundaries, if any (Open Source). Give all users the freedom they deserve and allow them to express individuality and adapt/tailor their desktop environment to suit their needs. Menu entries and other widgets will remain unaffected, so documentation, for instance, will not suffer as a consequence.

People work differently on a variety of applications, for a wide variety of purposes. The domains in which they work differ as well. A person working with many open windows at any given time might prefer to have “focus follows mouse cursor”. Contrariwise, to some, this “focus follows mouse cursor” behaviour is highly adverse to habits. To list yet another example, a Web server needs to have a light desktop environment that is less susceptible to breakage and consumes small amounts of RAM.

These considerations are all highly defensible. If Linux was to be deployed in more public clusters, for example, choice could (and should) be given as to which desktop environment should be used. Different strokes for different folks, but all can be catered for provided that disk space is made available. The pertinent settings would reside in the home directory of each user. Thumbs up to Gnome, KDE, and the rest of the self-motivated window manager teams around the world.

Related item: KDE Versus GNOME

Windows XP in AJAX

F Windows is ever to be used, it should be standards-compliant and perhaps, just perhaps, CSS-based. Have a look at the link. It’s worthwhile, I promise you. Try clicking the “Start” button, then navigating through the menus.

That site is an invaluable resource by all means. 5 years down the line when dual-boot no longer is a necessity to most, we will still be able to recall the days when a different operating system prevailed in this world. Since it’s Web-based, no bytes will be consumed on local storage either.