Exactly. I read the article yesterday in fact. As long as computing remains a scientific endeavor and not a medium, claims about performance, security, stability, etc., can be proven scientifically.
Free and open source software is a natural compliment to the scientific endeavor. I can say from personal experience that I chose to use Linux on servers, in spite of its steep learning curve (still climbing it!), over M$ Windoze because it was _free_ (speech, not beer) and open, and so I could really learn how server computing worked for myself, instead of gleaning clues from M$ documentation. And to be perfectly honest and self-incriminating, I am sending this message from a M$ Windoze XP laptop, because my job requires it (VB programming). However, my company is moving away from M$ and towards Java (whee!). It _seems_ like an improvement; time will tell. John Hebert -----Original Message----- From: Nashid Hasan To: [email protected] Sent: 8/27/03 8:39 AM Subject: [brlug-general] Microsoft Windows: Insecure by Design "In its default setup, Windows XP on the Internet amounts to a car parked in a bad part of town, with the doors unlocked, the key in the ignition and a Post-It note on the dashboard saying, "Please don't steal this." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34978-2003Aug23.html I think time is not on Microsoft's side no matter how much FUD or propaganda they throw at other alternative OSs. As time passes, people are becoming more and more aware that there are alternatives to M$ crap and these alternatives are known to be more stable than Window$ and far less open to crackers, viruses. _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net
