How can Microsoft be proud to market this drivel !

[Jeff]

>>
>> You used to comment all the time that linux doesn't need a firewall
>> because of how secure it is.... It wasn't until I pointed out to you the
>> fact that ubuntu comes with one that you changed that story...
>>
>>
>> Jeff
>
> Um, if it comes with one, one doesn't need another one. No can you stop
> being picky and just admit that Linux is MUCH safer than Windows?
>
> Alias

I'm not being picky just stating a fact....

I also don't see it as being "safer" just less likely to be attacked as
there are far fewer linux boxes out there than winodws boxes...

Jeff

 

[Alias]

Jeff wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I would think that the article by kaspersky labs would suffice as
>>> proof. If a virus was unable to infect a linux box how did it get out
>>> in the wild in the first place to be detected by these antivirus labs?
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>> It's talking about a possibility, not a common occurrence. It's also
>> possible that someone will steal your computer at gun point but does
>> that mean you should go out and hire bodyguards?
>>
>> Alias
>
> It's also possible someone could come and steal my linux box except I
> don't have one... The reason it doesn't occur (but has occurred) is
> because not nearly as many people use linux as windows. If the roles
> were reversed then you would hear people complaining about their linux
> box needing "cleaned"...

Unfounded speculation.

>
> The only reason you don't hear much if at all is because most people
> don't even know someone using linux...
>
> Jeff

The reason you don't hear about it is because it doesn't happen.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Jeff wrote:
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:eY9Rsj%23vHHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Jeff wrote:
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>> news:unAk$QwvHHA.3468@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Spirit wrote:
>>>>> Not exactly accurate :
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3601946
>>>>
>>>> It accurately reported NO Linux computer has been compromised.
>>>> Possibilities are one thing reality another. It's possible that you
>>>> will be struck by lightening today but unlikely.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>>
>>> The article did not report there weren't any either just that there
>>> are exploits and malware going around for Linux. But then if linux
>>> was so impervious how would it go around to begin with???
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>> Via some compromised Windows box, of course!
>>
>> Alias
>
> For some reason I doubt you are going to see windows running linux code...
>
> Jeff

Face it, Linux is almost bullet proof and Windows is a sieve.

Alias

 

[norm]

xfile wrote:
>> What % of new Linux users have never owned a computer?
>> What % of new Windows users have never owned a computer?
>>
>> What is the average computer experience of a new Windows user?
>> What is the average computer experience of a new Linux user?
>
>
> I can't help - so I apologize to all first
>
>
> Jupiter Jones presented some logical and reasonable questions for Linux
> community to think about though you may not wish to answer here but Linux
> advocates cannot afford to ignore those questions, if Linux really wants to
> be a valid "mainstream" alternative.
>
> I meant to write a longer post but decided to make a long story short:
>
> (1) If Linux is going to be a mainstream alternative, the community has to
> address those issues such as usability (not with your standards),
> application and driver availabilities, just to name a few. Note: Customers
> and users won't care about the reasons for not having enough, and all they
> care is what are given.
Please expound on the "issues such as usability (not with your
standards)" statement. What "standards" are you referring to? As to
applications and driver availabilities, where do these need to emanate
from, if not already available in open source? If a program is
proprietary and not ported to linux, does the fault lie with linux? If a
hardware manufacturer will not provide a linux driver or the source code
to linux so that a driver might be coded, does the fault lie with linux?
>
> (2) Price is one factor but not the only one. People pay for car insurance
> knowing (and hoping) they don't use it for most of the time, but still,
> they're willing to pay for it. It's the same logic for many are willing to
> buy products and sometime with support even they don't really use it. Sense
> of security is one of those factors. We all know search engines and
> communities are our friends, but I for one won't count on search engines and
> communities as our supports. The point is - price is not the only factor
> and refer to (1) for some other considerations.
Please consider the following in terms of your above statement. "Free"
in the open source community really isn't addressing the issue of cost.
It addresses the issue of freedom, as in freedom of use. An argument
becomes less so if one is arguing about the wrong concept.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html for reading on the issue.
"Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the
concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer."
Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy,
distribute, study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it
refers to four kinds of freedom, for the users of the software:
* The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
* The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your
needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a
precondition for this.
* The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
(freedom 2).
* The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements
to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access
to the source code is a precondition for this.

>
> Let me try for the last time by using two examples to demonstrate
> "technology" may not be relevant in some buying decisions, and one is in IT
> industry and the other one is in automobile industry:
>
> (1) ERP: SAP is the market leader of enterprise resources planning software
> (ERP is the common term) and when it and its partners engage a prospect
> (usually enterprise-level customers), they always start with senior business
> executives. Anyone has any experience on ERP would know the complexity of
> the software, and yet, if senior executives cannot comprehend the use of it
> in NON-TECHNICAL terms, none is going to spend multimillions US dollars on
> the software. Technologies and software specs won't even be discussed if
> the first evaluation won't pass.
If the above is true, it would seem unlikely that there would ever be
ANY technological improvements made if everything had to go through the
senior business execs first. Why have the need for people who are
trained and developed to evaluate what is available on the market and
make recommendations/decisions on what the company needs? Why have the
need for buyers that procure what is available based on recommendations
they might receive?
>
> Moral of the example: We can spend all the time we have till the end of the
> world on discussing and debating technologies but it won't matter much for
> the non-tech users and customers who represent the majority of the market.
> In particular, Linux community hasn't really spent too much effort in this
> area, if any. Until Linux community is willing to face and accept the fact,
> it won't change anything in the big picture.

The majority of the market is indeed unaware of choices that are
available. But the awareness of more choice is on the horizon.
>
> (2) Manual (stick-shift) vs. automatic transmission: How many people in the
> US (and many parts of the world) are now driving a stick-shift even it has a
> better fuel consumption and performance? Do car manufacturers roll back to
> stick-shift when we are having such unbelievable high oil prices or do they
> strive to come up other alternatives?
>
> Moral of the example: Most non-techies look for ease-of-use across all
> product categories including but not limited to IT products. Again, until
> Linux community is willing to face and accept it, it's not going to be the
> mainstream.

There have been vast strides made is ease of use concerning linux. Is it
for everyone? No. But it does have far more potential for mass use than
ever before.
>
> In summary, I am not saying or implying Linux is not a good OS or Vista is a
> better choice. What I have been trying to tell Linux advocates (or
> technical professionals for the same matter) is - technology by itself is
> not enough for people to use a product.
>
> Your collective efforts will have a much better return if spending on large
> OEM's (e.g. Dell, IBM, HP, Acer, etc.) and application and peripheral
> providers. Microsoft understood this long long long...time ago, and I still
> fail to understand for why Linux community doesn't follow a success story
> but insisting on a not-so-good one (a.k.a - Apple).
>
> As always, just my two cents thoughts, and my last post on OS alternative
> subject.
>
> Sorry if I offended anyone but it was not my intension.
>
>
> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
> news:OBgyXvyvHHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> Please clear the facts.
>> What % of new Linux users have never owned a computer?
>> What % of new Windows users have never owned a computer?
>>
>> What is the average computer experience of a new Windows user?
>> What is the average computer experience of a new Linux user?
>>
>> Give us these facts and end the speculation.
>> Many Linux advocates seem to base much of what they say on the above being
>> equal for both platforms.
>> I suspect these differences explain what I NEVER hear Linux advocates say.
>>
>> Waiting for your facts...
>>
>> --
>> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
>> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
>> http://www.dts-l.org
>>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:e4vbqoyvHHA.4132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> Larry Maturo wrote:
>>>> Hi Alias,
>>>>
>>>> You wrote:
>>>> Fact is that Windows is MUCH more susceptible than Ubuntu and, in the
>>>> unlikely case that one's Ubuntu box has become infected, all one need do
>>>> is nuke the user, create another one and restore the back up.
>>>>
>>>> Fact is, you are telling the unwashed masses to use Ubuntu. If they do,
>>>> you
>>>> can bet they won't have that backup. Also, if your campign succeeds,
>>>> then
>>>> virus, rootkit, and malware authors will start hitting Linux, so watch
>>>> what you
>>>> wish for.
>>>>
>>>> -- Larry Maturo
>>> Interesting speculation. Too bad it's only that: speculation.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>> news:eDCvIqwvHHA.4384@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are way too smug regarding how safe you believe Linux/Unix to be..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of the articles below explains how a Linux system can be a virus
>>>>>> carrier without the user ever knowing.. this situation is every bit as
>>>>>> bad as a Windows system that has been breached.. the others are from
>>>>>> different years, but all alerting to the fact that Linux/Unix and MAC
>>>>>> are not 100% virus immune..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have yet to come across a 'true' Linux professional who would put
>>>>>> their name to the misleading claims made by you.. your anti-MS stance
>>>>>> is blinding you to the realities of ANY OS.. that makes you
>>>>>> dangerous..
>>>>> Care to give me proof that a Linux box has been compromised? Can't?
>>>>> Didn't think so. Shall we compare the number of Windows boxes that are
>>>>> a part of a bot-herd to Linux? Didn't think so.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fact is that Windows is MUCH more susceptible than Ubuntu and, in the
>>>>> unlikely case that one's Ubuntu box has become infected, all one need
>>>>> do is nuke the user, create another one and restore the back up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:eS2gVRwvHHA.3468@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Richard Urban wrote:
>>>>>>>> Alias doesn't know about the history of his operating system of
>>>>>>>> choice to know that rootkits were developed for Unix and are 100%
>>>>>>>> effective in Linux/Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yet there are no reports of this possibility happening so go figure.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alias
>
>


--
norm

 

[Alias]

Jeff wrote:
>
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:ecnQpl%23vHHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> Jeff wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> And, so far, no one here has provided ONE CASE where a Linux box got
>>>> infected. All you've provided are theories and insults.
>>>>
>>>> Yawn.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>
>>> How many people here no many people that even use linux?
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>> I *know* quite a few.
>>
>> Alias
>
> Ok, one person....

There are others on this very news group that use Linux.

> Jeff

I know a family who would call a friend of mine who does computer repair
every three or four months because their son was downloading crap with
eMule. The machine was always chock full of viruses and malware. My
friend installed Ubuntu on a second hard drive and told the parents to
make sure the kid only used Ubuntu, not Windows. A year later and no
viruses or malware.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Kerry Brown wrote:
> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
> news:uESsVm%23vHHA.4736@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>> Um, if it comes with one, one doesn't need another one. No can you
>> stop being picky and just admit that Linux is MUCH safer than Windows?
>>
>> Alias
>
>
> It is safety by obscurity. I'll certainly admit that in it's default
> state Linux is more secure than any Windows desktop operating system in
> it's default state. This is more an accident of history and what users
> expect than anything else. In the server world I'd rate them about
> equal. In a non-default state Windows can easily be made as secure if
> not more secure than Linux. This is because there is a much bigger
> market for Windows products so niche products (like some security
> products) can be profitable. Even straight out of the box both Windows
> XP and Vista can be made as secure as Linux. With XP it takes some
> knowledge. With Vista it takes minimal knowledge. Running as a standard
> user with UAC on will do it.
>

Speculation based on a "what if". Sorry, chum, no cigar.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Jeff wrote:
>
>>>
>>> You used to comment all the time that linux doesn't need a firewall
>>> because of how secure it is.... It wasn't until I pointed out to you
>>> the fact that ubuntu comes with one that you changed that story...
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>> Um, if it comes with one, one doesn't need another one. No can you
>> stop being picky and just admit that Linux is MUCH safer than Windows?
>>
>> Alias
>
> I'm not being picky just stating a fact....
>
> I also don't see it as being "safer" just less likely to be attacked as
> there are far fewer linux boxes out there than winodws boxes...
>
> Jeff

That's the standard reason given but it's false.

Alias

 

[Alias]

Jeff wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Where do you think the term "root kit" came from? Is there a root
>>> user in Windows?
>>>
>>
>> Hence the need for a firewall which Ubuntu provides. Oops.
>>
>> Alias
>
> A firewall is not going to prevent the installation of rootkits.
>
> I believe sony was installing them just by playing their music cd's on
> your computer.
>
> So you buy some software (or download it for free) and it installs a
> rootkit that criples the security on your system or causes other
> problems. Since you said ok to installing it (even if you didn't know
> it was going to install a rootkit) how is linux or windows better in
> this case?
>
> Jeff

If it's not in the repository, no need to download or install it. If you
stupidly go out of your way to put crap on a Linux machine, of course,
it's possible!

Alias

 

[Frank]

Jeff wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I would think that the article by kaspersky labs would suffice as
>>> proof. If a virus was unable to infect a linux box how did it get out
>>> in the wild in the first place to be detected by these antivirus labs?
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>
>>
>> It's talking about a possibility, not a common occurrence. It's also
>> possible that someone will steal your computer at gun point but does
>> that mean you should go out and hire bodyguards?
>>
>> Alias
>
>
> It's also possible someone could come and steal my linux box except I
> don't have one... The reason it doesn't occur (but has occurred) is
> because not nearly as many people use linux as windows. If the roles
> were reversed then you would hear people complaining about their linux
> box needing "cleaned"...
>
> The only reason you don't hear much if at all is because most people
> don't even know someone using linux...
>
> Jeff

Jeff you're wasting your precious time dealing with that brain dead moron.
But of course you already know that.
I just hope the authorities catch up with his sorry ass real soon!
Frank

 

[Frank]

Alias wrote:

> Jeff wrote:
>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:eY9Rsj%23vHHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> Jeff wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>> news:unAk$QwvHHA.3468@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>
>>>>> Spirit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Not exactly accurate :
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3601946
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It accurately reported NO Linux computer has been compromised.
>>>>> Possibilities are one thing reality another. It's possible that
>>>>> you will be struck by lightening today but unlikely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The article did not report there weren't any either just that there
>>>> are exploits and malware going around for Linux. But then if linux
>>>> was so impervious how would it go around to begin with???
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>> Via some compromised Windows box, of course!
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>> For some reason I doubt you are going to see windows running linux
>> code...
>>
>> Jeff
>
>
> Face it, Linux is almost bullet proof and Windows is a sieve.
>
> Alias

Only in your dreams dick head!
Frank

 

[Jeff]

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:eZlAQj$vHHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Jeff wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> I would think that the article by kaspersky labs would suffice as
>>>> proof. If a virus was unable to infect a linux box how did it get out
>>>> in the wild in the first place to be detected by these antivirus labs?
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> It's talking about a possibility, not a common occurrence. It's also
>>> possible that someone will steal your computer at gun point but does
>>> that mean you should go out and hire bodyguards?
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> It's also possible someone could come and steal my linux box except I
>> don't have one... The reason it doesn't occur (but has occurred) is
>> because not nearly as many people use linux as windows. If the roles
>> were reversed then you would hear people complaining about their linux
>> box needing "cleaned"...
>
> Unfounded speculation.
>

What percentage of desktops run windows compared to linux?


>>
>> The only reason you don't hear much if at all is because most people
>> don't even know someone using linux...
>>
>> Jeff
>
> The reason you don't hear about it is because it doesn't happen.
>
> Alias

Explain the support sites helping linux users remove these virus's, trojans,
mal-ware, etc... If it doesn't happen???

Jeff

 

[The poster formerly known as Nina DiBoy]

Alias wrote:
> Jeff wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> And, so far, no one here has provided ONE CASE where a Linux box got
>>> infected. All you've provided are theories and insults.
>>>
>>> Yawn.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> How many people here no many people that even use linux?
>>
>> Jeff
>
> I *know* quite a few.
>
> Alias

Same here!

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

Most recent idiotic quote added to KICK (Klassic Idiotic Caption Kooks):
"They hacked the Microsoft website to make it think a linux box was a
windows box. Thats called hacking. People who do hacking are called
hackers."

"Good poets borrow great poets steal."
- T. S. Eliot

 

[Jeff]

>
> Face it, Linux is almost bullet proof and Windows is a sieve.
>
> Alias

A lot of americans used to believe that before pearl harbor...

Jeff

 

[Jeff]

>> I'm not being picky just stating a fact....
>>
>> I also don't see it as being "safer" just less likely to be attacked as
>> there are far fewer linux boxes out there than winodws boxes...
>>
>> Jeff
>
> That's the standard reason given but it's false.
>
> Alias

It is a FACT, there are far fewer linux boxes than windows boxes...

Jeff

 

[Jeff]

>
> If it's not in the repository, no need to download or install it. If you
> stupidly go out of your way to put crap on a Linux machine, of course,
> it's possible!
>
> Alias

Which would represent the majority of users out there...

Jeff

 

[Frank]

Alias wrote:

> Jeff wrote:
>
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:eWZERrwvHHA.4384@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>
>>> Richard Urban wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alias will refuse to believe "any" of this. He has placed his head
>>>> where the sun doesn't shine.
>>>>
>>>
>>> With what would one be safer from malware, Linux or Windows?
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>> I would think if they are both running protection (a/v, etc...) and
>> the user knows where he is getting his software from it would be about
>> equal...
>>
>> Jeff
>
>
> You're living in dreamland. Here's an example of a trojan for Windows
> that doesn't ask your permission to do *anything*:
>
> http://www.computerworld.com/action...ArticleBasic&articleId=9026323&intsrc=hm_list
>
>
> Oops.
>
> Alias

hehehe..."Attackers armed with an exploit tool kit have launched massive
attacks in Europe from a network of at least 10,000 hacked Web sites,
with infections spreading worldwide, several security companies warned
today."

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9025198

Ooooooooopppppppppsssss!

Frank

 

[Kerry Brown]

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:uK%23LJm$vHHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Kerry Brown wrote:
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:uESsVm%23vHHA.4736@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>>
>>> Um, if it comes with one, one doesn't need another one. No can you stop
>>> being picky and just admit that Linux is MUCH safer than Windows?
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>>
>> It is safety by obscurity. I'll certainly admit that in it's default
>> state Linux is more secure than any Windows desktop operating system in
>> it's default state. This is more an accident of history and what users
>> expect than anything else. In the server world I'd rate them about equal.
>> In a non-default state Windows can easily be made as secure if not more
>> secure than Linux. This is because there is a much bigger market for
>> Windows products so niche products (like some security products) can be
>> profitable. Even straight out of the box both Windows XP and Vista can be
>> made as secure as Linux. With XP it takes some knowledge. With Vista it
>> takes minimal knowledge. Running as a standard user with UAC on will do
>> it.
>>
>
> Speculation based on a "what if". Sorry, chum, no cigar.
>
> Alias


I wasn't speculating. I was telling you how it is

--
Kerry Brown
Microsoft MVP - Shell/User
http://www.vistahelp.ca

 

[Bill Yanaire]

The Real reason....

The reason he had no viruses or malware is because he doesn't know how to
use Ubuntu. Powered up the PC twice, scratched his head, then decided to
use the XBOX instead!


"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:Oe7zcl$vHHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Jeff wrote:
>>
>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>> news:ecnQpl%23vHHA.1188@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> Jeff wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And, so far, no one here has provided ONE CASE where a Linux box got
>>>>> infected. All you've provided are theories and insults.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yawn.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>
>>>> How many people here no many people that even use linux?
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> I *know* quite a few.
>>>
>>> Alias
>>
>> Ok, one person....
>
> There are others on this very news group that use Linux.
>
>> Jeff
>
> I know a family who would call a friend of mine who does computer repair
> every three or four months because their son was downloading crap with
> eMule. The machine was always chock full of viruses and malware. My friend
> installed Ubuntu on a second hard drive and told the parents to make sure
> the kid only used Ubuntu, not Windows. A year later and no viruses or
> malware.
>
> Alias

 

[xfile]

We can go on like this forever since I feel you didn't understand the
context.

Final point: Technology makes things happened, and maybe even better, but
people don't buy technology. Do you know what technologies are embedded in
iPhone and how many tempted to buy one know or even care to find out?

If Linux community doesn't bother to understand how and why people buy
products, you are fighting a losing war.

Consider what I said is a free advice, take it or leave it. That's all.



"norm" <noone@afakeddomain.net> wrote in message
news:uT9HEl$vHHA.3508@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> xfile wrote:
>>> What % of new Linux users have never owned a computer?
>>> What % of new Windows users have never owned a computer?
>>>
>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Windows user?
>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Linux user?
>>
>>
>> I can't help - so I apologize to all first
>>
>>
>> Jupiter Jones presented some logical and reasonable questions for Linux
>> community to think about though you may not wish to answer here but Linux
>> advocates cannot afford to ignore those questions, if Linux really wants
>> to be a valid "mainstream" alternative.
>>
>> I meant to write a longer post but decided to make a long story short:
>>
>> (1) If Linux is going to be a mainstream alternative, the community has
>> to address those issues such as usability (not with your standards),
>> application and driver availabilities, just to name a few. Note:
>> Customers and users won't care about the reasons for not having enough,
>> and all they care is what are given.
> Please expound on the "issues such as usability (not with your standards)"
> statement. What "standards" are you referring to? As to applications and
> driver availabilities, where do these need to emanate from, if not already
> available in open source? If a program is proprietary and not ported to
> linux, does the fault lie with linux? If a hardware manufacturer will not
> provide a linux driver or the source code to linux so that a driver might
> be coded, does the fault lie with linux?
>>
>> (2) Price is one factor but not the only one. People pay for car
>> insurance knowing (and hoping) they don't use it for most of the time,
>> but still, they're willing to pay for it. It's the same logic for many
>> are willing to buy products and sometime with support even they don't
>> really use it. Sense of security is one of those factors. We all know
>> search engines and communities are our friends, but I for one won't count
>> on search engines and communities as our supports. The point is - price
>> is not the only factor and refer to (1) for some other considerations.
> Please consider the following in terms of your above statement. "Free" in
> the open source community really isn't addressing the issue of cost. It
> addresses the issue of freedom, as in freedom of use. An argument becomes
> less so if one is arguing about the wrong concept.
> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html for reading on the issue.
> "Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the
> concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer."
> Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute,
> study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it refers to four
> kinds of freedom, for the users of the software:
> * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
> * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your
> needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
> * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
> (freedom 2).
> * The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to
> the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to
> the source code is a precondition for this.
>
>>
>> Let me try for the last time by using two examples to demonstrate
>> "technology" may not be relevant in some buying decisions, and one is in
>> IT industry and the other one is in automobile industry:
>>
>> (1) ERP: SAP is the market leader of enterprise resources planning
>> software (ERP is the common term) and when it and its partners engage a
>> prospect (usually enterprise-level customers), they always start with
>> senior business executives. Anyone has any experience on ERP would know
>> the complexity of the software, and yet, if senior executives cannot
>> comprehend the use of it in NON-TECHNICAL terms, none is going to spend
>> multimillions US dollars on the software. Technologies and software
>> specs won't even be discussed if the first evaluation won't pass.
> If the above is true, it would seem unlikely that there would ever be ANY
> technological improvements made if everything had to go through the senior
> business execs first. Why have the need for people who are trained and
> developed to evaluate what is available on the market and make
> recommendations/decisions on what the company needs? Why have the need for
> buyers that procure what is available based on recommendations they might
> receive?
>>
>> Moral of the example: We can spend all the time we have till the end of
>> the world on discussing and debating technologies but it won't matter
>> much for the non-tech users and customers who represent the majority of
>> the market. In particular, Linux community hasn't really spent too much
>> effort in this area, if any. Until Linux community is willing to face
>> and accept the fact, it won't change anything in the big picture.
>
> The majority of the market is indeed unaware of choices that are
> available. But the awareness of more choice is on the horizon.
>>
>> (2) Manual (stick-shift) vs. automatic transmission: How many people in
>> the US (and many parts of the world) are now driving a stick-shift even
>> it has a better fuel consumption and performance? Do car manufacturers
>> roll back to stick-shift when we are having such unbelievable high oil
>> prices or do they strive to come up other alternatives?
>>
>> Moral of the example: Most non-techies look for ease-of-use across all
>> product categories including but not limited to IT products. Again,
>> until Linux community is willing to face and accept it, it's not going to
>> be the mainstream.
>
> There have been vast strides made is ease of use concerning linux. Is it
> for everyone? No. But it does have far more potential for mass use than
> ever before.
>>
>> In summary, I am not saying or implying Linux is not a good OS or Vista
>> is a better choice. What I have been trying to tell Linux advocates (or
>> technical professionals for the same matter) is - technology by itself is
>> not enough for people to use a product.
>>
>> Your collective efforts will have a much better return if spending on
>> large OEM's (e.g. Dell, IBM, HP, Acer, etc.) and application and
>> peripheral providers. Microsoft understood this long long long...time
>> ago, and I still fail to understand for why Linux community doesn't
>> follow a success story but insisting on a not-so-good one (a.k.a -
>> Apple).
>>
>> As always, just my two cents thoughts, and my last post on OS alternative
>> subject.
>>
>> Sorry if I offended anyone but it was not my intension.
>>
>>
>> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
>> news:OBgyXvyvHHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>> Please clear the facts.
>>> What % of new Linux users have never owned a computer?
>>> What % of new Windows users have never owned a computer?
>>>
>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Windows user?
>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Linux user?
>>>
>>> Give us these facts and end the speculation.
>>> Many Linux advocates seem to base much of what they say on the above
>>> being equal for both platforms.
>>> I suspect these differences explain what I NEVER hear Linux advocates
>>> say.
>>>
>>> Waiting for your facts...
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
>>> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
>>> http://www.dts-l.org
>>>
>>>
>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>> news:e4vbqoyvHHA.4132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>> Larry Maturo wrote:
>>>>> Hi Alias,
>>>>>
>>>>> You wrote:
>>>>> Fact is that Windows is MUCH more susceptible than Ubuntu and, in the
>>>>> unlikely case that one's Ubuntu box has become infected, all one need
>>>>> do
>>>>> is nuke the user, create another one and restore the back up.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fact is, you are telling the unwashed masses to use Ubuntu. If they
>>>>> do, you
>>>>> can bet they won't have that backup. Also, if your campign succeeds,
>>>>> then
>>>>> virus, rootkit, and malware authors will start hitting Linux, so watch
>>>>> what you
>>>>> wish for.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- Larry Maturo
>>>> Interesting speculation. Too bad it's only that: speculation.
>>>>
>>>> Alias
>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>>> news:eDCvIqwvHHA.4384@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You are way too smug regarding how safe you believe Linux/Unix to
>>>>>>> be..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One of the articles below explains how a Linux system can be a virus
>>>>>>> carrier without the user ever knowing.. this situation is every bit
>>>>>>> as bad as a Windows system that has been breached.. the others are
>>>>>>> from different years, but all alerting to the fact that Linux/Unix
>>>>>>> and MAC are not 100% virus immune..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have yet to come across a 'true' Linux professional who would put
>>>>>>> their name to the misleading claims made by you.. your anti-MS
>>>>>>> stance is blinding you to the realities of ANY OS.. that makes you
>>>>>>> dangerous..
>>>>>> Care to give me proof that a Linux box has been compromised? Can't?
>>>>>> Didn't think so. Shall we compare the number of Windows boxes that
>>>>>> are a part of a bot-herd to Linux? Didn't think so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fact is that Windows is MUCH more susceptible than Ubuntu and, in the
>>>>>> unlikely case that one's Ubuntu box has become infected, all one need
>>>>>> do is nuke the user, create another one and restore the back up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:eS2gVRwvHHA.3468@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>> Richard Urban wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Alias doesn't know about the history of his operating system of
>>>>>>>>> choice to know that rootkits were developed for Unix and are 100%
>>>>>>>>> effective in Linux/Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yet there are no reports of this possibility happening so go
>>>>>>>> figure.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alias
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> norm

 

[norm]

xfile wrote:
> We can go on like this forever since I feel you didn't understand the
> context.
I was trying to understand the points you were trying to make, that is
why I asked the questions I did. I wasn't asking for advice, so I will
just leave it. Have a good one.
>
> Final point: Technology makes things happened, and maybe even better, but
> people don't buy technology. Do you know what technologies are embedded in
> iPhone and how many tempted to buy one know or even care to find out?
>
> If Linux community doesn't bother to understand how and why people buy
> products, you are fighting a losing war.
>
> Consider what I said is a free advice, take it or leave it. That's all.
>
>
>
> "norm" <noone@afakeddomain.net> wrote in message
> news:uT9HEl$vHHA.3508@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>> xfile wrote:
>>>> What % of new Linux users have never owned a computer?
>>>> What % of new Windows users have never owned a computer?
>>>>
>>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Windows user?
>>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Linux user?
>>>
>>> I can't help - so I apologize to all first
>>>
>>>
>>> Jupiter Jones presented some logical and reasonable questions for Linux
>>> community to think about though you may not wish to answer here but Linux
>>> advocates cannot afford to ignore those questions, if Linux really wants
>>> to be a valid "mainstream" alternative.
>>>
>>> I meant to write a longer post but decided to make a long story short:
>>>
>>> (1) If Linux is going to be a mainstream alternative, the community has
>>> to address those issues such as usability (not with your standards),
>>> application and driver availabilities, just to name a few. Note:
>>> Customers and users won't care about the reasons for not having enough,
>>> and all they care is what are given.
>> Please expound on the "issues such as usability (not with your standards)"
>> statement. What "standards" are you referring to? As to applications and
>> driver availabilities, where do these need to emanate from, if not already
>> available in open source? If a program is proprietary and not ported to
>> linux, does the fault lie with linux? If a hardware manufacturer will not
>> provide a linux driver or the source code to linux so that a driver might
>> be coded, does the fault lie with linux?
>>> (2) Price is one factor but not the only one. People pay for car
>>> insurance knowing (and hoping) they don't use it for most of the time,
>>> but still, they're willing to pay for it. It's the same logic for many
>>> are willing to buy products and sometime with support even they don't
>>> really use it. Sense of security is one of those factors. We all know
>>> search engines and communities are our friends, but I for one won't count
>>> on search engines and communities as our supports. The point is - price
>>> is not the only factor and refer to (1) for some other considerations.
>> Please consider the following in terms of your above statement. "Free" in
>> the open source community really isn't addressing the issue of cost. It
>> addresses the issue of freedom, as in freedom of use. An argument becomes
>> less so if one is arguing about the wrong concept.
>> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html for reading on the issue.
>> "Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the
>> concept, you should think of free as in free speech, not as in free beer."
>> Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute,
>> study, change and improve the software. More precisely, it refers to four
>> kinds of freedom, for the users of the software:
>> * The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
>> * The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your
>> needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
>> * The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor
>> (freedom 2).
>> * The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to
>> the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to
>> the source code is a precondition for this.
>>
>>> Let me try for the last time by using two examples to demonstrate
>>> "technology" may not be relevant in some buying decisions, and one is in
>>> IT industry and the other one is in automobile industry:
>>>
>>> (1) ERP: SAP is the market leader of enterprise resources planning
>>> software (ERP is the common term) and when it and its partners engage a
>>> prospect (usually enterprise-level customers), they always start with
>>> senior business executives. Anyone has any experience on ERP would know
>>> the complexity of the software, and yet, if senior executives cannot
>>> comprehend the use of it in NON-TECHNICAL terms, none is going to spend
>>> multimillions US dollars on the software. Technologies and software
>>> specs won't even be discussed if the first evaluation won't pass.
>> If the above is true, it would seem unlikely that there would ever be ANY
>> technological improvements made if everything had to go through the senior
>> business execs first. Why have the need for people who are trained and
>> developed to evaluate what is available on the market and make
>> recommendations/decisions on what the company needs? Why have the need for
>> buyers that procure what is available based on recommendations they might
>> receive?
>>> Moral of the example: We can spend all the time we have till the end of
>>> the world on discussing and debating technologies but it won't matter
>>> much for the non-tech users and customers who represent the majority of
>>> the market. In particular, Linux community hasn't really spent too much
>>> effort in this area, if any. Until Linux community is willing to face
>>> and accept the fact, it won't change anything in the big picture.
>> The majority of the market is indeed unaware of choices that are
>> available. But the awareness of more choice is on the horizon.
>>> (2) Manual (stick-shift) vs. automatic transmission: How many people in
>>> the US (and many parts of the world) are now driving a stick-shift even
>>> it has a better fuel consumption and performance? Do car manufacturers
>>> roll back to stick-shift when we are having such unbelievable high oil
>>> prices or do they strive to come up other alternatives?
>>>
>>> Moral of the example: Most non-techies look for ease-of-use across all
>>> product categories including but not limited to IT products. Again,
>>> until Linux community is willing to face and accept it, it's not going to
>>> be the mainstream.
>> There have been vast strides made is ease of use concerning linux. Is it
>> for everyone? No. But it does have far more potential for mass use than
>> ever before.
>>> In summary, I am not saying or implying Linux is not a good OS or Vista
>>> is a better choice. What I have been trying to tell Linux advocates (or
>>> technical professionals for the same matter) is - technology by itself is
>>> not enough for people to use a product.
>>>
>>> Your collective efforts will have a much better return if spending on
>>> large OEM's (e.g. Dell, IBM, HP, Acer, etc.) and application and
>>> peripheral providers. Microsoft understood this long long long...time
>>> ago, and I still fail to understand for why Linux community doesn't
>>> follow a success story but insisting on a not-so-good one (a.k.a -
>>> Apple).
>>>
>>> As always, just my two cents thoughts, and my last post on OS alternative
>>> subject.
>>>
>>> Sorry if I offended anyone but it was not my intension.
>>>
>>>
>>> "Jupiter Jones [MVP]" <jones_jupiter@hotnomail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:OBgyXvyvHHA.1208@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>>> Please clear the facts.
>>>> What % of new Linux users have never owned a computer?
>>>> What % of new Windows users have never owned a computer?
>>>>
>>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Windows user?
>>>> What is the average computer experience of a new Linux user?
>>>>
>>>> Give us these facts and end the speculation.
>>>> Many Linux advocates seem to base much of what they say on the above
>>>> being equal for both platforms.
>>>> I suspect these differences explain what I NEVER hear Linux advocates
>>>> say.
>>>>
>>>> Waiting for your facts...
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jupiter Jones [MVP]
>>>> http://www3.telus.net/dandemar
>>>> http://www.dts-l.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>> news:e4vbqoyvHHA.4132@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Larry Maturo wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Alias,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You wrote:
>>>>>> Fact is that Windows is MUCH more susceptible than Ubuntu and, in the
>>>>>> unlikely case that one's Ubuntu box has become infected, all one need
>>>>>> do
>>>>>> is nuke the user, create another one and restore the back up.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fact is, you are telling the unwashed masses to use Ubuntu. If they
>>>>>> do, you
>>>>>> can bet they won't have that backup. Also, if your campign succeeds,
>>>>>> then
>>>>>> virus, rootkit, and malware authors will start hitting Linux, so watch
>>>>>> what you
>>>>>> wish for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- Larry Maturo
>>>>> Interesting speculation. Too bad it's only that: speculation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alias
>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:eDCvIqwvHHA.4384@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>> Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
>>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are way too smug regarding how safe you believe Linux/Unix to
>>>>>>>> be..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One of the articles below explains how a Linux system can be a virus
>>>>>>>> carrier without the user ever knowing.. this situation is every bit
>>>>>>>> as bad as a Windows system that has been breached.. the others are
>>>>>>>> from different years, but all alerting to the fact that Linux/Unix
>>>>>>>> and MAC are not 100% virus immune..
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have yet to come across a 'true' Linux professional who would put
>>>>>>>> their name to the misleading claims made by you.. your anti-MS
>>>>>>>> stance is blinding you to the realities of ANY OS.. that makes you
>>>>>>>> dangerous..
>>>>>>> Care to give me proof that a Linux box has been compromised? Can't?
>>>>>>> Didn't think so. Shall we compare the number of Windows boxes that
>>>>>>> are a part of a bot-herd to Linux? Didn't think so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fact is that Windows is MUCH more susceptible than Ubuntu and, in the
>>>>>>> unlikely case that one's Ubuntu box has become infected, all one need
>>>>>>> do is nuke the user, create another one and restore the back up.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alias
>>>>>>>> "Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:eS2gVRwvHHA.3468@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>>>>>> Richard Urban wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Alias doesn't know about the history of his operating system of
>>>>>>>>>> choice to know that rootkits were developed for Unix and are 100%
>>>>>>>>>> effective in Linux/Ubuntu.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Yet there are no reports of this possibility happening so go
>>>>>>>>> figure.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Alias
>>>
>>
>> --
>> norm
>
>


--
norm