Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on January 28, 2004 02:27 PM
Considering then, that virii such as this take minimal effort, then why is Microsoft so defenseless against them? Poor OS design, maybe?
That is as big a side-step I've ever seen. I'll take it that you concede my point.
I'll still answer your question anyway. Microsoft's problem is three-fold, IMO. The first problem Microsoft has is what you would call "poor OS design". Microsoft's line of operating systems comes from a single-user, desktop environment and the security model of Windows and Windows applications reflects that history. Roughly speaking, Windows makes it too easy to do some things and when you combine that with the other two parts of the problem, an uninformed user-base and a large legacy install-base, you've got a recipe for disaster. What made Microsoft so successful has come full circle and to bite Microsoft in the ass.
True, but the opinion of the original poster stated that Mr. Perens explicitly blamed SCO, which is what I refuted.
Perens wasn't far off in apportioning blame to SCO. To be honest, I'm not sure why you chose to refute his post at all when you acknowledge that Perens' claims are weak.
Open Source a propoganda network? Let's see...
Is it Open Source that's running a massive "Get the Facts" FUD campaign? (and even putting ads on "supposed" Linux sites) Has Linus Torvalds ever needed to fund a biased study that touts Linux superiority over Microsoft? And if you think Bruce Perens spreads propoganda and FUD, then I can't wait to hear your opinion of Rob Enderle. Let's face it, Microsoft is a monopoly - even the federal government said so. Linux is a threat to that monopoly. Linux has no need to spread FUD - they're not the ones with a monopoly (and multi-billion dollar fortunes) to protect.
Perhaps you should ask where the money for some of your favorite websites comes from. Or maybe you should read some of the comments on this site, or on Groklaw and evaluate them with a critical eye. Want an example of FUD about SCO? Look no further than the article above - Perens implies that SCO is dastardly enough to write a virus to attack its own website. Factual basis? He needs none. This is a propaganda war and SCO are the enemy.
The greatest irony of them all is that contributers to Slashdot, Groklaw and Newsforge see themselves as contributing to some great beacon of truth - but end up repeating and spreading just as much untruth and FUD about the enemy. Look at your own posts here - you admit that Perens has a weak case but you are still defending him. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense really.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Open Response to MrWinston
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 28, 2004 02:27 PMThat is as big a side-step I've ever seen. I'll take it that you concede my point.
I'll still answer your question anyway. Microsoft's problem is three-fold, IMO. The first problem Microsoft has is what you would call "poor OS design". Microsoft's line of operating systems comes from a single-user, desktop environment and the security model of Windows and Windows applications reflects that history. Roughly speaking, Windows makes it too easy to do some things and when you combine that with the other two parts of the problem, an uninformed user-base and a large legacy install-base, you've got a recipe for disaster. What made Microsoft so successful has come full circle and to bite Microsoft in the ass.
True, but the opinion of the original poster stated that Mr. Perens explicitly blamed SCO, which is what I refuted.
Perens wasn't far off in apportioning blame to SCO. To be honest, I'm not sure why you chose to refute his post at all when you acknowledge that Perens' claims are weak.
Open Source a propoganda network? Let's see...
Is it Open Source that's running a massive "Get the Facts" FUD campaign? (and even putting ads on "supposed" Linux sites) Has Linus Torvalds ever needed to fund a biased study that touts Linux superiority over Microsoft? And if you think Bruce Perens spreads propoganda and FUD, then I can't wait to hear your opinion of Rob Enderle. Let's face it, Microsoft is a monopoly - even the federal government said so. Linux is a threat to that monopoly. Linux has no need to spread FUD - they're not the ones with a monopoly (and multi-billion dollar fortunes) to protect.
Perhaps you should ask where the money for some of your favorite websites comes from. Or maybe you should read some of the comments on this site, or on Groklaw and evaluate them with a critical eye. Want an example of FUD about SCO? Look no further than the article above - Perens implies that SCO is dastardly enough to write a virus to attack its own website. Factual basis? He needs none. This is a propaganda war and SCO are the enemy.
The greatest irony of them all is that contributers to Slashdot, Groklaw and Newsforge see themselves as contributing to some great beacon of truth - but end up repeating and spreading just as much untruth and FUD about the enemy. Look at your own posts here - you admit that Perens has a weak case but you are still defending him. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense really.
#