[ale] "What's So Bad About Microsoft?"

[Greg]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org]On Behalf Of Steve
> Nicholas
> Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 11:41 PM
> To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
> Subject: RE: [ale] "What's So Bad About Microsoft?"
>
>
> I have not had a problem with MS on my wife's PC.  I keep it patched, a
> she's smart about attachments.  Win 2K.  That being said....
>
> What is the problem with MS ?
>
> In my case, both Linux and MS require constant patching.


I trust an OpenBSD/Debian patch more as I don't see any agendas to
continually seperate me from my money on their part.  MS however is a
different story, and that is a reason to be wary of the MS patching.
However, that's what I expect from them ...


  OK, that's a
> given.  Linux has virtual desktops.  I have to do upgrades on up to 20
> libraries. Each library requires at least two windows.....
> one for the upgrade and another to tail the results.  No, I don't do all
> at the same time, but I've done 4 at a time.  Do the math.  Not a problem
> on my home pc. Plus, The memory management is a lot better.
>
> Try running THAT many windows under MS.  Works for me under Linux. It can
> take up to 16 windows on 4 virtual desktops to do this.  I've done this on
> a P233 w/64MB without a problem.  Does not work under MS.

No, it doesn't and never will.  I don't think MS ever figured out how to be
conservative with memory (seems to be a Unix trait) and that is why I
haven't bought any more MS products around here.  I use Win2k (pretty
stable - actually the best of the bunch) and Windows 98 virgin (unpatched)
for games and I got my wife on a dual boot also.  She runs Windows 98
unpatched and not networked for her games (updates screwed her system up
terribly - intentionally I suspect) and Debian for everything else. All of
the other servers - mail,dns,SAMBA, everything is a P233 or less.  I guess I
do blame MS for this software/hardware arms race that only serves to fill
landfills with toxic pc components and drain the consumers wallets.




>
> Steve
>
> =======================================================
> | Steve Nicholas             |                        |
> | Software Systems Engineer  |  A risk is not a risk  |
> | Georgia State University   |  until it is taken.    |
> | snicholas at gsu.edu          |                        |
> | 404-651-1062               |  BBROYGBVGW            |
> =======================================================
>
>
> On Sun, 14 Mar 2004, Greg wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org]On
> Behalf Of David
> > > Corbin
> > > Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 9:01 PM
> > > To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts
> > > Subject: Re: [ale] "What's So Bad About Microsoft?"
> > >
> > >
> > > "Their product is unsafe."
> >
> > No, their product doesn't take into account user error.  There
> are plenty of
> > MS networks that are relatively safe just as there are plenty of Unix
> > networks that have been cracked to death.  PC's are like guns - they are
> > inanimate objects until a person picks one up.  With proper firewalls,
> > practices, and usage MS products are what you make of them. No
> more no less.
> >
> >
> >   or "Their products only work when the
> > > moon is in
> > > proper alignemnt"  (both points that any daily user will
> generally agree
> > > with).
> >
> > My Windows 2k box is up for weeks running 3-4 open browsers
> each with about
> > 8 different windows and lots of other crap.  I keep it up
> because I can, and
> > I haven't had any more problems than I have had with a *nix box.  But
> > overall I would say yes, they (MS) are less on the uptime then *nix.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sunday 14 March 2004 20:18, Jeff Hubbs wrote:
> > > > I need a short, succinct, answer to this question.  "Twice-convicted
> > > > illegal monopolist"
> >
> > you can as it is the truth (IBM was also convicted of monopoly I think)
> >
> > is a phrase I'd plan on using, but I want to be able
> > > > to back even that up with the facts and I'd also like to
> remain factual
> > > > enough not to come off as a frothing-at-the-mouth zealot but general
> > > > enough to make it a good answer for non-techies or Microsoft-only
> > > > techies.
> > > >
> > > > What do you think?
> > > >
> >
> > Why waste time with zealots of any ilk ?  Zealots turn off anyone to
> > anything, and you are *never* going to win them over or win an
> argument with
> > them.  I am so tired of these "my os/blah blah blah is better then yours
> > arguments."  I would rather spend my time learning more about what's out
> > there. <sigh>
> >
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Ale mailing list
> > > > Ale at ale.org
> > > > http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > >
> > > --
> > > David Corbin <dcorbin at machturtle.com>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ale mailing list
> > > Ale at ale.org
> > > http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ale mailing list
> > Ale at ale.org
> > http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ale mailing list
> Ale at ale.org
> http://www.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
>