mouss wrote:
>
> At 13:29 10/07/01 -0400, Graham, Randy (RAW) wrote:
> >I feel the "paying-beta-tester" slam is a little out of line, especially
> >when the alternative is "a more stable and more mature product." I realize
> >that in the security arena, new typically means "not as secure," but I still
> >think this is a bit too much of a slam.
>
> yes, and after all, these args are all wrong:)
> It simply means people's behaviour is the same as in "real" life. They follow
> what other do, because it requires resources (and courage?) to judge by
> themselves.
Sorry... I don't get it...
>
> I dunno anything about stonestuff, but there is nothing on earth that seems to
> prove that FW1 is better than their product or anything else.
And you're right!!! :-) Just the way as there's nothing on earth that
seems
to prove that free software is better than commercial software, MAC's
vs PC's, Windows vs UNIX, and some other religious stuff... everyone has
his
own thoughts and his own preferences...
I mean, what it's good for you, it could be not good for me, and
viceversa.
And that's good... that's why you always have choices... and that's
good...
> So the only way is:
> - can one get infos on their product?
> if no, break; else continue:
> - can one decide whether it is good or bad?
> if no, break; else continue:
> - if bad, say it. if good say it.
>
That's what I did... :-)
> Remember that one day all these products were new. yes, they're now old,
> some may say mature, but they all got their bugs and will get yet undiscovered
> ones.
You're completly right... :-)
>
> I'm amazed that this reaction is different from that of people supporting qmail
> and postfix and saying that sendmail should be abandoned....
You pay the same money for both, in both you can see the sources,
but you've lots of successful histories and lots of people saying that
qmail and postfix solver their issues... :-)
> I'd add:
> - the court question: many respeactable companies have been in court. This
> may not be
> used as an arg against a company. The old "let us fight on a techno basis"
> is just utopic.
And that was not an argument... :-P just a thought... if it was an
argument to you, is your choice... :-)
> - next generation gui: I always laugh hard when I hear the "next
> generation" 2-words. I always
> considered that this is addressed to dumb people who get excited by shiny
> ads. My answer will
> always be the same: don't gimme next generation things, gimme things that work.
I always ask the same... (working stuff) but.... about your thought...
What
can I do if the actual name is "Next Generation"? I can't name it other
way... :-P
> (Martin, this isn't against you personally, but you used args that don't
> stand for me...).
It's ok... you're expressing yourself, just as any other person
can do it... :-)
Best regards.
- Mart�n.
--
Martin H. Hoz-Salvador
EX-A-IEC, EX-A-FIME
http://gama.fime.uanl.mx/~mhoz
"Daddy, Why doesn't this Magnet pick up this Floppy Disk?"
_______________________________________________
Firewalls mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
