All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
Reasons why not to use M$...
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by SPoT:
Ok, back to the virus thing 1 mo time with feeling. Nothing is secure. Yes it is very possible to get into a Linux super user login and crash it, transfer info, or wipe it out. Linux is not unhackable. Can I do it? No. But can it be done and will you see it more and more as the OS is more commonly used? Yes.
--- End quote ---
Splotch, you still don't get it do you? Did I ever one time say Linux was unhackable? No, why? Because I have had a Linux box hacked in to before (it was a honey pot). But why on earth do you continue to try and equate hacking with virus? They are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS! Now, give us some valid *virus* examples. I've yet to see one. Linux boxes are hacked in to every day, for the same reasons NT boxes are hacked in to every day, because the administrators are dumb asses. The difference being, with Linux you can patch a hole yhourself and not wait on the vendor to decide if they want to put it on their priority list. MS in many cases have taken *years* to come up with security patches.
psyjax:
quote:Originally posted by SPoT:
I work in a buisness where I have to look at money every day. I have to look at costs vs. profits. To make money for my company, I have to give the best service I can to draw customers away from my competitor, or at least give then a service no one else can. Now if someone comes along and offers a better service for less, Im dead unless I adjust for the compitions product also. I have to keep up to be profitable.
No one has even tried to keep up with Microsoft, so now they are dead in the water, looking for a handout.
--- End quote ---
This is my exact complaint. I don't think M$ is offering a better service. They are forcing their inferior service on people and using their ill-gotten billions to push it on them.
What I am trying to say is that from what I have observed, M$ dose not seek to abide by the ideas of making a better product or service, their interest is in forcing competition to it's knees, kinda like a legal shake down.
Im sure in your buissness, whatever it is, competition is respected, and compeating between people should foster that sort of "one upmanship" between companies. This is a good thing, like you say it produces better products and the like.
M$ has no respect for this, and I see countless products that outshine their versions of things yet their versions remain popular. The reason they remain popular is because they forcfully discurage the use of compeating products.
For instance a while back, IE wouldent allow regualar Java to run on it so as to push M$'s compeating Java standard. Or bundling explorer into their OS and making it painfully difficult to remove. Another thing was reserving the key API's to their OS, crippling developers ability to compeate with M$. These things are not in the interest of competition, but rather a way to "trap" users.
And as for your energy and phone company Analogy, I see this as exactly what M$ is doing. Perhapse they do not have that level of expansive control yet, but they are gearing up for it. Every incarnation of their OS seems to get closer to it's goal.
The internet may not be food or water, but it is probably one of the single most revolutionary advancess in communication and the free exchange of ideas since Guttenberg's printing press. One company controling the users access and experience of this new medium would surely not be a good thing.
M$ has reserved the right to colect info on it's users, and they have a nice little agreement that can be retroactively changed by them to aid them in this goal. Please tell me how these things serve to make a better product?
Im sure in your buissness you don't go stealing your competitors ideas and then directly invest in their distruction and or dismantling. This is the sort of thing M$ likes to do. Do you go into public forums and spread bad rummers about your competitors?
Finaly, despite all this M$ is a monopoly. They have gotten so big, and so widespread that no one has a hope of compeating. So they don't need to make a better product because they have no one to "one up", in this case they just start making up rules and difrent ways to extort money from the user. Limited installs on their software, their wonderfull phone home policy, and their new introduction of spyware into thier OS.
Are any of these things in the interest of making a good product and succeding thrugh those means?
[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: psyjax ]
SPoT:
MS has gotten very large, but they built it.
They made the industry while the other guys did nothing. All of the software companys had the same chance in the begining. And when a company comes out with something revolutionary and standard breaking, they will get their moment in the sun. But the fact is that instead of creating their own product, they want to get into someone elses.
MS designs the software, so what if another version of java wont run on it. Its a MS product. They do have the right to create product that only runs with thier product, and not allow 3rd party product to run on it. What Linux product runs with windows in mind? But thats ok right?
quote:
M$ has reserved the right to colect info on it's users, and they have a nice little agreement that can be retroactively changed by them to aid them in this goal. Please tell me how these things serve to make a better product?
--- End quote ---
Another I agree on. But not that big a deal. The good part of this is it allows MS to find out what kind of hardware its OS is being run on and gives them the oppertunity to build a better OS around the hardware. The bad part is privacy. I dont like it anymore than you do, but we live with it every day. With your license plate number I can find out more than MS can with their software. I dont put anything I dont want anyone to know on my PC anyway. I wouldnt put that on anything.
quote: Im sure in your buissness you don't go stealing your competitors ideas and then directly invest in their distruction and or dismantling. This is the sort of thing M$ likes to do. Do you go into public forums and spread bad rummers about your competitors?
--- End quote ---
Oh boy. This happens all the time in the buisness world. I saw a example of it at my company. Another company was spreading rumors of a bankruptcy to try and create a doubt in our customers minds. They went so far as to say we could be closing our doors at any time. the world stock exchange is built on speculation and rumors.
As far as ideas go, Im sure that MOST of the people that have created the software Microsoft uses were compensated. As for the others, Ideas are just that. No copywrite, no protection. Changing a product to squeek by the copywrite happens all the time too. Its not fair or right, but its not illegal.
And the biggest point methinks all of you are missing is that you dont NEED Microsoft. You dont NEED Linux. You dont NEED a computer. Nothing is forced upon you cuz you dont NEED any of it. Its your choise. You guys chose not to use MS products for various reasons, but in my view, those reasons arent important enough to stop me from using it and some of these reasons would put millons out of work with no place to go. That is good for no one.
My reasons for saying Fuck Microsoft are the bundled software I have to hack out of it to make it run better, and save drive space. Thats all, well maybe not all, but the most I have to deal with. That and XP, the most usless bit o' software to crawl out from under a rock.
Alrighty, Linux Viruses.
Do I know an example. No, I dont. I dont need one. Today, tomorrow, next year, it will happen. How do I know? Cuz some people are twisted. If I look hard enough, Ill find one, or I can find someone to write it for me, or givin enough motivation, Ill write one myself. How hard it is makes no difference. The virus point is about as usless as the stability issue. 75% of all PC users will never see one, or a drive will fail before they do. My point on it was that nothing is secure.
[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: SPoT ]
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by SPoT:
What Linux product runs with windows in mind? But thats ok right?
--- End quote ---
Samba? Wine? Konqueror? Xanim? VNC? OpenOffice? Gnumeric? Koffice? FAT/FAT32/NTFS file system support? Upon installation it takes care to preserve Windows if installed and set it up as a boot menu choice? (I can continue if you wish) Not to mention the incredible difficulty in making said OS try to interact with Winblows because MS keeps everything so much of a secret you have to reverse engineer the load of garbage to make any of the above possible. Most OS vendors publish as much detail as they can to gain interoperability with their product. Not M$, they don't want interoperability, they want total destruction of anything not M$.
quote:
And the biggest point methinks all of you are missing is that you dont NEED Microsoft. You dont NEED Linux. You dont NEED a computer. Nothing is forced upon you cuz you dont NEED any of it. Its your choise. You guys chose not to use MS products for various reasons, but in my view, those reasons arent important enough to stop me from using it and some of these reasons would put millons out of work with no place to go. That is good for no one.
--- End quote ---
What? Well you are correct on the first couple of things. We don't NEED any of it. But if M$ has it's way, if we WANT it, you'll only have one choice. Some of us prefer not to choose M$ products.
quote:
My reasons for saying Fuck Microsoft are the bundled software I have to hack out of it to make it run better, and save drive space. Thats all, well maybe not all, but the most I have to deal with. That and XP, the most usless bit o' software to crawl out from under a rock.
--- End quote ---
You've taken the first step. You may be happier if you move on to step 2, 3, and 4.
quote:
Alrighty, Linux Viruses.
Do I know an example. No, I dont. I dont need one. Today, tomorrow, next year, it will happen. How do I know? Cuz some people are twisted. If I look hard enough, Ill find one, or I can find someone to write it for me, or givin enough motivation, Ill write one myself. How hard it is makes no difference. The virus point is about as usless as the stability issue. 75% of all PC users will never see one, or a drive will fail before they do. My point on it was that nothing is secure.
--- End quote ---
Maybe if you actually used and learned about OSs other than M$ you might realize that you don't have to be convinced that viruses need to be a part of your life. I've already explained why it can never be a widespread problem. Primary virus stopper in the *NIX world is a good security model, and much diversity in system and user applications and programs. With microsoft, every machine has the same code base and the same vulnerabilities. So as soon as you create a virus it can wipe out the entire fleet. several of the past viruses passed along via a worm email (Melissa, I-LOVE-YOU, and their many variants) *could* have done real damage, but luckily for MS people the virus writer was not related to Bin Laden.
Hacking in to a system is something completely different than a virus as we've finally agreed and any machine connected to a network is vulnerable regardless of OS.
[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
SPoT:
I dont worry about viruses. I have had them, got rid of them, didnt lose anything important. I have also had mutiple hard drive, RAM, BIOS and motherboard failures. The loss of data is something that can happen at any time. You dont need a virus for it. And all a virus really is is an automated set of commands. These commands can be written into any code on any OS. The Linux comunity seems to be more concerned about creating than destroying at this point and time, but viruses will emerge. Count on it. Its not that it cant be done, its just that they havent hit yet.
I didnt mean Windows products that run on Linux, I ment Linux products that run on Windows. And the answer is you cant. If you change the Linux code to DOS, its now a DOS program. They arent compatable. But Microsoft is expected to create a IE browser for Linux? This is an agument in the Monopoly case. MS has no skill in the Linux operating system, they are very interestd in it for profit though.
I have used Linux.
Mandrake 7.0 Had a horrible time. It was fun to learn something new, and I had to learn or it was no go. I liked the way it ran when I was done, but there were a few points that made me decide to drop it. Its not a bad OS, it just doesnt do anything I want it to do.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version