> > >Say, tomorrow Microsoft starts updating your system, without your consent. > > > What are you going to do? > > > > strange conspiracy theory! lol > I have never believed in conspiracy theory and neither intend to in the > future - > http://windowssecrets.com/2007/09/13/01-Microsoft-updates-Windows-without-users-consent > http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/137208/microsoft_downplays_stealth_update_concerns.html >
So, Is that the BEST source of reference you could get to make your point? Making a judgement in info-sec related matters based on a "reporters" view is rarely practical and so called member panel of windowssecrets.com doesn't look credible on info-sec background so are their analysis if you do a close reading. Even, If 10% if what they hype holds ground do you expect the "security community" would stand that and yet stay quiet about microsoft. > Arguments can be made either way. It seems till today, the culprit has never > been the free software developers inserting nasty stuffs into the kernel. yes, but sometimes, their procedure! Most of general FOSS end users or BUSINESS PROFESSIONALS will care less about who is the culprit. They just want a secure software. They want a credible download. After update they want things to work smoothly without worrying much about the stability of the release. >On top of that, free software packaging go through rigorous checking process >by "sponsor" who use lot of nifty tools to isolate the package and THEN only run >it (e.g., chroot jail, valgrind etc..). really? I didn't knew code review and quality assurance is done that way, chroot jail, valgrind really? So you say using "nifty tools" and then "isolating the package" and THEN only running it will detect hidden back doors (say intentional software bugs inserted by a cracker?) > > Occupational hazard. Tell me these days, whose system is not vulnerable? That > is why they have security professionals like you working on their broken > system 24/7, isn't it? And please Bipin :-), don't tell me Microsoft kernel > is more robust,secure than Linux. Microsoft spend $6+ BILLION Dollars and 5 years in its OS. But i am with you in his one brother, Microsoft still haven't matched FOSS solution when it comes to multi user system. > > That "pretty good" is not good enough for me and lot of foss enthusiasts like > me. Why does Apache server (Apache license) comparatively run on more servers > than IIS (Microsoft proprietary server)? stability and features. >Why does Windows XP run on more desktops than Linux? I say, easy and friendly solution for the masses with acceptable security risk for most users :) > Treacherous Platform Module - TPM. There might be added value and benefit > with hardware based solution to security (encryption keys, smart cards etc..) > but one has to think in terms of monopoly. Who's running the show? the > hardware vendors+ microsoft. No, one has to think in terms of initiation and added security benefits. Are hardware vendors stopping FOSS community from using features as DEP and TPM? The group that visioned the benefit is leading NOT running the show, as Apple did with GUI. But if you dont want TPM don't use it..... and ignoring it WONT affect FOSS in any ways, does it? > Just a side note, why do you think EU is suing Microsoft for class-action > >lawsuit? Do you think EU is nuts? > no... lol because of Microsoft monopolistic market. > I don't believe it was because of old hardware or price. It was mostly > because Vista's device driver sucked big time. OEM vendors didn't like it a > bit because people were calling up long in queue for their drivers issue, > meaning they had to get hardware vendor programmers to actually write a > compatibility layer on top of already available windows XP drivers. yes, and seldom so with every release of linux kernel. New OS brings new issues initially in hardware. Windows XP released years back supported SATA while we at the linux community were pushing pencils in installations with SAT hdd not very long ago. >This was wasted resource for the OEM vendors. Secondly, it doesn't add any >value-benefit to enterprise customers who use Windows XP so the adoption rate is very low >(http://searchsmb.techtarget.com/originalContent/0,289142,sid44_gci1241536,00.html) in enterprise market. > It does add value-benefit to enterprise customers if they consider better security in microsoft solution. But again, enterprise customers wont go shopping after immediate release of NEW os in market. They will wait and watch for some times till stability, security and hardware issues has been initially sorted out. That's why we have vista for desktop but the server version is yet to be released. > > rapidly so as the software.7 years ago i wanted a 1 gb hdd so badly. 4 > > years ago my 20 gb hdd was big enough for me for a year ,currently i > > am finding my 250 gb not inadequate. Like, right now i would find it > > hard to fit my important datas, some music, debain installation and > > backup on the hard disk i had 4 years ago. > True. Hardware are cheap but you wouldn't expect everyone to upgrade their > hardware every 5 years, would you? Think in broader sense; FOSS is for the en > masse and not restricted to elites. Everyone is not motivated enough > (financially or otherwise) to upgrade their hardware every 5 year. TRUE BIKAL, this was just an argument to make my point. Glad we played it healthy..... :) FOSS rocks, -bipin --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ FOSS Nepal mailing list: [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/foss-nepal To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Community website: http://www.fossnepal.org/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
