SCO v. IBM

Message ID: 368624 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Common Man Likes Microsoft http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/29/ms_cabbies_back_gatesf/ The governments, Micrsoft's competitors and sundry Microsoft-haters all want to regulate the hell out of Microsoft and make it behave, but the company is the darling of the masses. We all know how the people in China, India and other places prefer pirating Windows to loading certain free operating systems on their machines. Now, we find that the Luxembourg cab drivers are solidly behind Microsoft. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 368385 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Linux is rubbish http://www.eetimes.com/article/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=18901858 Linux: unfit for national security. "An awful lot of decisions involving national-defense implications are being made on the basis of price and personal bias, and not upon sound evaluation of the underlying tools and software. And it's happening in places where it should not be happening." Read and weep. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 367877 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: What if SCO wins? The question is not about the merits of SCO's case, but it is - why are the Loonies here on this board, driving down stock price and trying to bankrupt SCO (though in their own minds)? Why are they so desperate to avoid seeing this case go to conclusion? Are they so deseparate to hold on to IBM's donated code? Do they know their own creation is worthless without the donated code? All these are points to ponder for the open source lovers. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 367663 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Why Linux Sucks Here is somebody that seems to have used Linux quite a bit. Note the way he prefixes his remarks - "I know I take the risk of generating a lot of heat with this post, ..". He seems to be aware that the Linux Nuts don't take kindly to any criticism of Linux and attack mercilessly even if the criticism comes from one of their own. Note the very first comment - "switch to PCLinuxOS". It is assumed that, if you are running Linux, you have no life, and will gladly switch from one distribution to another to get some small thing working! http://timdorr.com/archives/2005/09/why_linux_as_a.php "This article was mainly inspired by my (failing) attempts to set up my MythTV box. I understand that Myth is still heavily in development, but it's still a pain in the ass to set up. QAM256 HDTV is possible in it, but it took an ungodly amount of time to work the channel frequencies and setup before I cou

Message ID: 367343 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Dell Does NOT Do Linux Desktop I pointed out that Dell doesn't sell Linux desktop because Linux desktop is no good. Posters on this board sidestep that and want to talk about server stuff.  The fact that Dell is selling Linux servers suggests Dell is not under Microsoft's thumb. So, if Dell is not selling Linux desktop, there have to be reasons for it other than a conspiracy to crush Linux. Now, Kevin Carmony made a post on groklaw wherein he explains why Dell and others don't touch Linux desktop with a 10-foot pole - "Until Linux can get even close to the functionality of Windows, they're not interested." Unfortunately, the facts don't fit in with the "Linux is so good, but everybody is screwing us" mythology promulgated by the posters here. So, in spite of direct experience quoted by Kevin Cormony, the Nuts want to close their eyes and ears and repeat their mantra.  Face it guys, there is no c

Message ID: 366999 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The Linux Security Myth http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/interviews/4495/1/ ".. whether or not I can do all the maintenance on my own car... if I have to go back and install a fix to the breaks every time it crashes and kills somebody, I don't view that as more secure. Secure means it doesn't need the patches. It's done right the same time. So the people who are saying that their code is more secure and it still needs patches every other week--whether it's proprietary or open source--are playing fast and loose with the semantics of what security means." "Windows is awful, but well, so is Linux. Neither presents an environment that your average business user or government user or home user is able to install and use out of the box without worries. And in fact, if you look at your typical Linux distributions, with all of these tools and extra drivers and everything that's thrown on, a lot of that

Message ID: 366101 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The Linux Mess http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6061491-2.html?tag=st.next The last time I commented on the practices of brain-dead Linux kernel coders, people were nitpicking about the date of the article and the like. Here it is again, from one of Linux's own. Just goes to show how the Linux zealots on this board keep finding excuses to keep their head buried in the sand. >> With the existing fluid interface in Linux, programmers must provide drivers for numerous kernel variations, and old drivers--open or proprietary--stop working, said Miguel de Icaza, vice president of development at Novell. "Contrast this with Windows, where there is a stable interface for drivers in the kernel. A driver developed against NT 4 works on XP," he said. <<< >>> Fedora and Novell's equivalent, OpenSuse, don't ship with the proprietary drivers, requiring users to jump through extra hoops to obtain and in

Message ID: 365993 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: FUD as an answer to FUD http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/183/ Back in 2000, the Linuz zealots were claiming Linux is an easy-to-use system. And, now in 2006, they claim Linux improved a lot and has become easy to use, thus proving that they have been lying their asses off until now. (Actually, they are lying even now - you will know that in a few years.) See the reponse from "kjk" to the FUD from the lying Linux zealots: "Linux secure? I'm sure you dilligently skip all bugtraq reports, after all one remote exploit a week is not that big of a security risk. Linux can be made reasonably secure, something I hope I did with my machine after some script kiddie got root and installed back door because I was naive enough to left DNS server that came with RedHat 6.2 running. Linux is easy if you have an infinite amount of time to spend learning it and secure if you have lots of money to spend on people who can make it sec

Message ID: 365918 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The Vicious Linux Cult The Nuts have started verbally attacking and maligning Rochkind in full earnest. It's not enough to bring bad name to Unix (by badly imitating it), but the vicious cult won't spare the Unix geeks either. I haven't seen Rochkind's output, but if it is about the 'Unix way' or some such, it is probably too vague for the courts. SCO, of course, caught more breaks in this case than anyone ever expected, so who knows, this may be all they need to rid the world of the Linux scourge. In any case, the matter is out of the Nuts' hands. They have to abide by the court's decision. Going after Rochkind will only land them in jail. (BTW, is it a weird coincidence that the Texas man is preaching restraint, or did he get a call from his parole officer?) This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-Sha

Message ID: 365595 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The Rochkind Revenge I have had the good fortune to read the first edition of Rochkind's Advanced Unix Programming when I was a beginning C programmer on Unix systems. It was an excellent book - Mr. Rochkind knows his subject very well. You get the impression he likes writing about Unix. I can see two reasons why Mr. Rochkind wanted to deliver the devastating blow to the Linux weenies that he did by supporting SCO. As he states on his web site, he is clearly annoyed by the piss poor Linux desktop - he tries to be nice and stops with only 10 reasons. Mr. Rochkind is a Unix lover, and Linux is a particularly bad clone of Unix. But, as it is popularly known as a Unix clone, people frequently equate Linux shortcomings to Unix. In other words, Linux drags Unix's good name through the mud, and this is clearly painful to Unix lovers. The moral of the story is, if you sit in your parents' basement and churn out shitty software and

Message ID: 365085 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: In Summary I'm glad that I posted the messages I did this morning. The Linux Nuts promptly repeated their lies, and sort of proved my point for me. They see this whole thing as a propaganda war, and they admit to no weekness in Linux. In the real propaganda war, Microsoft is much more truthful than the Linux side. In their morbid hatred for Microsoft, and their insane zeal to gain new uses for their substandard software, the Linux supporters elevated FUD to a new art form. Some Nuts parade my old statements to show the disparity. (One Nut chose a nym that looks almost the same as mine - they have to resort to all kinds of tricks to subvert the discussion to personal insults!) Those statements were made when I was in the Linux cult. I was simply repeating the cult propaganda. So what if Windows users have to spend a little money, and a little time to care for their PC. They have an incredibly useful and easy-to-use device as a resu

Message ID: 364962 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Open Source Mythology http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/18/firefox_security_update/ I like Mozilla, and I use Mozilla (and some other open source programs). What I am against is the open source dogma - the idea that open source programs tend to be better in quality and related mythology. All of these security vulnerabilities in Mozilla ought to give pause to the Linux Nuts. Instead of going off on Microsoft for its problems, they ought to shut up and look more closely at their own buggy software. Try reading the Unix Haters Handbook sometime if you think the Unix security is all that! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 364851 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Lying Linux Losers http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8281593260.html "If you think setting up and using a printer in Linux is too much trouble, take heart -- you're not alone." Linux printing is so fucked up, they have plans to organize multiple "summits" in an attempt to fix it. We will see if they actually manage to fix it (it is common in the Linux world to have initiatives that start with a bang and then completely fizzle out in time), but one thing is clear. The Linux liars on this board have been caught lying for the umpteenth time! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 364725 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Terrible Year for Linux http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2006/03/10/pc_shipments_slowdown/ Desktop PC sales are on the decline, and laptop sales are on the way up. We all know how much more Linux sucks on laptops! (Cue the lies of the Linux Nuts!) Linux delenda est! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 364653 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Piracy reduced by 60% in China http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2006/04/17/169264-lenovo-most-chinese-pcs-have-windows?pp=1 "70 percent of the computers Lenovo sells in China are now loaded with licensed Windows copies, up from 10 percent six months ago." 30% will still run pirated Windows copies, but with cooperation from the Chinese Government, Microsoft will get them too. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 363949 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Lame Linux Consequences It is clear that Rochkind is pissed off by the unusable Linux desktop. He is doing what he can to eradicate the nuisance, and sort of put it out of its misery! Let this be a lesson to the Linux weenies! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 363612 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Windows 4 Linux 0 Now that the Linux fans had a chance to recover from the terrible blow they received in the court today, we can return to the Windows vs Linux discussion. Let's compare Windows and Linux: Linux - lots of intellectual property (IP) problems Windows - no IP problems Linux - one long-running, and very annoying law suit Windows - no law suits Linux - fate hangs in hands of non-technical jury Windows - fate rests in safe (Microsoft) hands, with full backing from the U.S. Government Linux - communist underpinnings Windows - capitalist roots (meets the U.S. Government standards) Choose Windows. Say goodbye to law suits. (Microsoft has enough cash to settle any future ones!) This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 363190 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Linux zombies http://blogs.zdnet.com/threatchaos/?p=310 http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=191 The articles are about some machines that got owned, but what is notable is the hypocricy of the Linux crowd as seen in the comments. Even social engineering is counted as a Windows flaw if Windows users are affected. If it is the Linux machines that got owned, the Linux zealots attack the messenger! As I said, the Linux cult largely consists of losers, crybabies, and liars! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 363106 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Microsoft - what is to love The vast majority of PC users don't just "surf the web, exchange email, or compose a letter". They hook up a variety of peripherals to their PC's. You can hook up almost any new electronic toy to a Windows PC, and expect to use it right away. Despite being nontechnical, the users are able to use the PCs to their full potential with the help of easy to use Microsoft software. Microsoft deserves a great deal of credit for making computing accessible to almost the entire world. They turned nothing into a multibillion dollar business. On the other hand, a Unix clone is under development for the last 15 years. It's only recently (4-5 years?) that it became powerful enough to be used as a server platform, though it is still a distant second to Windows. Software donated by IBM and other companies played a large part in its success as a server. On the desktop front, it is still very hard to us

Message ID: 362980 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The Linux Bliss http://hallx049.oit.umn.edu/linux/ipod/ This guy seems to have the "why do it the easy way if you can do it the hard way" mentality so often seen in Linux weenies, but look at the convolutions and gyrations to undergo before the damn thing is installed! Again, we find that the reality is far removed from the glib 'how hard is to do configure; make; make install' lie you often hear from Linux apologists. Also notice that he had "previously experimented with amaroK, which totally fucked up my iPod. Even iTunes on a Mac couldn't read the iPod after that." Just because a program came on a Linux disk, and it has a pretty interface, it doesn't mean that the program is not completely fucked up inside. There is a lot of pre-alpha software out there on Linux disks. You can somehow try and use desktop Linux, but never buy any new hardware to use with it! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has

Message ID: 362605 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The Linux Cult Cults have several things in common. They all have a charismatic leader. They all think they have exclusive access to some special knowledge. They think they will ultimately save the whole world, or change it for the better. They frequently predict the beginning of the New Order on a certain future date, and frequently revise the prediction after it proves false. The Linux Cult has multiple leaders, but most members believe Torvalds is a paragon of technical excellence, full of sound judgment and all that. The Linux culties think they know some special things about operating systems, security and software in general. They think that if most of the world switches to Linux, the world will be a better place. They frequently predict that Microsoft dominance will end on a certain future date, and frequently revise their prediction after it proves false. Linux culties are usually arrogant (and that is because they think they

Message ID: 361777 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Linux Trickery http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=567 As I had said, Linux desktop needs supporters because it can't make it on merit! It needs an inside man, a trojan horse, a kind of closet Linux fan to push it in and deal with the resitance. Paul Murphy explains how to use trickery to get Linux into your company. User acceptance is a *big* problem! (Was it the Scottish Policemen that rejected Linux desktop? And, what's going on with the Munich folks - they are awful quiet of late?) This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 360939 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Barrier to desktop linux adoption is .. Linux itself! http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS6166677144.html "The biggest barrier to Linux business desktop adoption is Linux itself, because too many distributions make it harder for developers to port to or create applications for Linux, ..." First, make a million incompatible distributions. Then, try to make them all compatible! This must be the open source method! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 360889 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The Linux Cop-outs The Linux Nuts have a handful of excuses to explain why the home users don't use their software. These allow them to continue living in their fantasy world where nothing is wrong with Linux. But, every now and then, something happens to bring them temporarily into the real world. Like when a prominent Nut said this in a rare moment of honesty: "This kind of crap is exactly why Linux has had such trouble gaining traction among nontechnical users ..." http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cups-horror.html Mr Raymond went on to set up a web site to address usability issues. This was two years ago. The Linux programs continue to be as unusable as ever, so the web site didn't seem to help. Like the countless web sites, bodies and consortiums that came before it to "fix" the open source software, the site continues to exist without fulfilling any real function. This is a typical open source situati

Message ID: 360754 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: XGL and The Bazaar Myth The OSS advocates vax eloquent about how the collaborative development model leads to superior quality software. 'Babbling bazaar of different agendas and approaches' is how Eric Raymond describes the open source method. The rule is you should release early and often so you can incorporate the community feedback early into the development. A look at many of the open-source programs actually suggests that bazaar model leads to awful software. First of all, the method reads like an exercie in Extreme Programming, where there is little design, and the program is kind of grown as time elapses. Little upfront design means no clear direction, and the programs can get quite unwieldy. (e.g. the fat Linux kernel resembles its "fat, drunken-looking" penguin logo so much these days!) Second, the (evolutionary) design-by-committee leads to a program that attempts to do a lot of different things, and ends

Message ID: 360723 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Linux needs supporters Like somebody said, if Ford is giving its cars away for free, won't there be a stampede of people trying to get them? If a good desktop operating system is available for free on internet, why isn't everybody rushing to load it on their PCs? There is an army of volunteers that sing praises of Linux every chance they get. They post messages all over the internet urging everyone to switch to Linux and realize its wonderful benefits. In fact, this phenomenon is so well known that people coined a term for it -- "Linux evangelism". The term is not used derogatorily. It is used by the Linux supporters themselves. What is a religious term doing in a setting like this? Why do the Linux supporters feel the need to "preach" to others? If you ask the Linux supporters, they will tell you that people are ignorant, and need to be told what is good for them. But, the Linux supporters have been at thi

Message ID: 360484 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Linux Nuts admit to cheating The Linux Nuts admit it - Microsoft hasn't hurt the Linux desktop at all! They simply use that as an excuse to explain away their failure. And, they keep pointing out that Microsoft is an illegal monopoly just as a smokescreen. They hope you will choose their lousy product if you hate Microsoft enough! They claim they are morally superior to Microsoft because they don't have a multi-million dollar budget sponsoring their lies. It's all clear now, guys. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 359957 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: The truth about Linux http://ericburke.com/blog/2005/08/31/33 Yet another "satisfied" user! Linux desktop share is tiny, but the share is huge in one category: former users! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 359731 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Always the bridesmaid http://tinyurl.com/kvocl "Fear of handset viruses deter companies: survey" Funny that there is no mention of Linux anywhere in the article. Don't tell me Linux is nowhere in the picture! I mean, for all the hype about Linux, nobody seems to want to use it! This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Message ID: 358968 Posted By: deepdistrust Subject: Free Software Sucks It's official! Free Software sucks! hhttp://tinyurl.com/p8c7w hhttp://tinyurl.com/r8xnq Required reading for all Linux nuts! There will be a quiz in a couple of days. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.