In a message dated: Thu, 11 May 2000 03:17:40 EDT
Derek Martin said:
>Yesterday, Paul Lussier gleaned this insight:
>
>> Currently this is true, at least for Netscape. What happens in the future
>> when the current Windows App development companies start shipping their
>> prodicts for Windows? What happens when MS is forcibly broken up, and they
>> start shipping Office/Outlook for Linux?
>
>Currently, you run Linux, because you recognize that MS products have
>serious issues. Do you plan to change your mind suddenly when MS releases
>Outlook for Linux? I didn't think so...
I'm not saying *I* will change my mind. What I'm saying is that the current
argument for *not* using Linux on the desktop is "Lack of apps" which loosely
translates to "Lack of MS Office". One Office is ported to Linux (which is
like to happen fairly quickly if MS is broken up) we may see many large
companies with many ingnorant/dumb users moving Linux to the desktop with
Office/IE/Outlook on it. When that occurs, then these types of things can and
will happen. The fact that it's an application problem and not an OS problem
will be entirely ignored by the media, and greatly played up by the MS pr
folks. Linux is currently a shining star in the market right now. This is
all it will take to shoot that shining star and have linux-based companies'
stock plummet.
>> Not true. The devastating aspect of ILOVEYOU and Melissa was that it
>> replicated itself via e-mail and mailed itself to everyone in a persons
>> addressbook or corporate LDAP directory. A simple perl script, auto
>> executed could have severely damaging consequences. True, the most it
>> could do is delete the users own files, but what if the user owns files
>> across a wide array of NFS mounted partitions? Consider a perl or shell
>> script which figures out the where the home directory of the user is,
>> backs up to the parent directory, performs a
>> "find ./ -iregex '.*address.*' -print" and then starts mailing itself to
>> every e-mail address contained within any of those found files.
>
>Well, if you choose to turn such a feature on, I'll have little sympathy
>for you when this happens. I might even consider "accidentally" losing
>the backup tapes that have your files on them... You'll probably figure
>out fairly quickly that you shouldn't have that crap on.
As a sysadmin, I'll have lot's of sympathy for you as you begin restoring not
only my files from those tapes, but those of all the other people in the
company whose file got blown away the same way. And please explain how you
will turn to the CEO and tell him you "accidently" lost the backup tapes with
his files on it? Or the CFO, who will probably turn to you and reply that,
"Oh, your salary review was contained in those files, as was your employment
contract. I guess you no longer work for us." :)
The scenario I described hits more than one person, and it replicates itself
sending it to everyone in everyone's address book files. So you may not have
sympathy for me, but I sure will for you as you have 200+ people screaming
at you to recover their files.
>I don't think it will happen so easily. Unix people have had 30 years to
>figure out that lots of people just aren't as nice as they ought to be...
>ultimately it's current Unix people who will be teaching the future Unix
>people, so that lesson will get passed on. You learned it, didn't you?
I am but one person. And yes, as a sysadmin, I've learned lot's of lessons
that the average person hastn't. How many times have we had unix users come
to us to restore files because they had no clue how to properly use the tools
they were given to do the job. Keep in mind, there is a huge difference
between a "unix person" and a user. A "unix person" is someone who
understands how great this stuff is and why. We get off on figuring it out,
trying to break it, making it better, and playing with it. a "user" is
someone who just wants to get their job done. Just like you don't want to
change the oil in your car yourself, they don't want to waste time learning
something that they think doesn't relate to their job. However mistaken that
attitude is, that's life. The lessons you refer to will get passed on, but
only to other "unix people", users will continue to be users, and will
continue to ignore us, and will continue to unknowlingly and stupidly cause
harm through their ignorance as they have so many times in the past on Windows
systems. The OS they're running won't change that.
>Plus, let's not forget that most people who run Linux on their PC
>do so because they find MS apps unsatisfactory, and often the nature of
>that which they find lacking is security and stability.
Currently, today, right now, this is true. Shoot forward a few years to when
Linux is just as popular as Windows, MS has been broken up, and Office 2001
for Linux is selling like hotcakes (granted, this will be sometime in 2006 :)
We will see large companies moving desktops to Linux, and they will be running
MS Office. And it will happen quickly.
> I don't think people will be flocking in droves to run microsoft apps
> on Linux any time soon.
People like you and I, and the others in the linux community, no. But CEOs
and CIOs who suddenly find out that MS is endorsing Linux by shipping Office
for Linux, and now realize they can save millions by no longer paying license
fees for 98 or NT? I see that as a real possibility.
>And sure, other vendors have issues, but none are so glaring and prevalent
>as those in microsoft products. They're by far the worst in my
>experience.
Agreed! And they will continue to be, even on the Linux platform!
--
Seeya,
Paul
----
"I always explain our company via interpretive dance.
I meet lots of interesting people that way."
Niall Kavanagh, 10 April, 2000
If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
