OT: Is Bill Gates the Anti-Christ?

[Thermodyne]

Originally posted by PvK:


Which brings us to Thermodyne's "everyone loves MS when they can get it for free, or use it for free", which I know is definitely not the case for let's see... actually almost everyone I know who uses it. They put up with it and use it because it is often free (or hidden-cost) for them, and a standard most people have, and is useful, if imperfect.

PvK

If we are talking about home Users, then by all means, use what you want. But don’t ***** about having to register your copy, and then ***** because you actually have to obey the EULA. But on the other hand, if it is enterprise, then show us something that is better than MS and we will look at it. UNIX is too user unfriendly for the PITA’s to use with the exception of some very specific applications. Linux is not bad on the desk top, but server side is still absolute junk. FreeBSD is the worst of the lot. And in the enterprise, open source is not free and often it is hard if not imposable to insure.

Actually, I think you need a broader sample of people to base your statement on. I know literally hundreds of people that use many different OS’s. And very few fault MS OS’s except for price. Some like Linux and some like Windows, but invariably the largest ***** is the cost of XP and the inability to stretch the license across several systems. Now granted these are IT people, which more or less weeds out the incompetent *****ing that arises from the PITA’s when they FUBAR an install of wonder why their 15 year old spread sheet is no longer supported. And let’s no forget the PITA’s that “Had no Idea that bringing that floppy from their sick home system would hurt the network!” Or the ones that constantly log id10T errors, then complain about MS. The same ones that scream about “feeling violated” when confronted with the facts in the logs.

Another often over looked point is that the major OEM's all modify windows to some extent. And often the blame for the problems that arise are laid at MS's feet.

[Thermodyne]

Originally posted by Taera:
a good point however - if such a system would be released, why would the corporate world switch to it, possibly souring certain relationships with other companies?

Shared keys would still be used for secure transfers, as they are today.

This would secure documents that were removed for the site, (stolen) because access to the server would be required to open them. Sure the guys at Ft. Mead would read them in a few moments. But you average Joe Schmoe would not be able to DL documents as he prepared to start that new job with the competition. Sure, he could still print it out, but it's not that hard to catch reams of paper.

[ September 21, 2003, 04:02: Message edited by: Thermodyne ]

[Instar]

I feel MS is blamed FAAAAAAAR too much. I really like XP (I have used Linux, and it is nice, but not up my alley too much). I ran a distro of Linux, of course it did not support much of my hardware, but it worked. Microsoft is the market leader for a reason -- their stuff is pretty good. Sure, they have done some monopolistic stuff, penalize them for it, but lets not go crazy.

[Fyron]

But it is so trendy to bash MS...

[Me Loonn]

Actually, bashing the MS has to be done with left hand and swings has to be made counter-clockwise, else be "His" wrath be upon the unworthy.
So sayeth the anonymous profet, the Psalm of Judas (Jud 5:5).



[ September 21, 2003, 18:09: Message edited by: Me Loonn ]

[minipol]

Well the answer to the question "Is Bill Gates the Anti Christ" is quite simple. Yes

* Bill has more money than Satan
* Bill makes Satan look like a friendly neighbour
* ...

On a more serious note, as for the article, he's right in most things he says about M$ but comparing them with the devil? Come'on, be serious.

I do not like where M$ is heading but we, customers created "the beast".
And they use tactics that you can expect from a company looking to expand it's business and revenue. A lot of companies tries to do the same. Nothing exceptional there. But i don't like it one bit.

Anyway, if they keep charging as much as they do for all there products, they will drive people into the arms of less expensive alternatives. A lot of people hate the monopoly M$ has yet they keep on buying or using their tools. If more people where using some other OS than Windows, things might not look as grim but as i said earlier, if you keep on using M$ stuff, don't complain.

Windows is not a bad os neither is GNU/Linux or *BSD. But i like GNU/Linux more because it allows me to change almost anything, something you cannot do with any Version of Windows up to date. You just don't have as much freedom with Windows and that something i really enjoy when using GNU/Linux.

[minipol]

Originally posted by Thermodyne:
But on the other hand, if it is enterprise, then show us something that is better than MS and we will look at it. UNIX is too user unfriendly for the PITA’s to use with the exception of some very specific applications. Linux is not bad on the desk top, but server side is still absolute junk. FreeBSD is the worst of the lot. And in the enterprise, open source is not free and often it is hard if not imposable to insure.

Pfff. Really. The os's you talked about UNIX, Windows and Linux practically all do the same and are IMO almost as good as one another at it. A system is as secure as it's administrator so if you hire a guy who knows Linux, he's going to install it faster that windows and more secure than if he would have to install a windows server.

But on the other hand, if it is enterprise, then show us something that is better than MS and we will look at it.

You named a couple of replacement OS's yourself. And they are as good. If you say they aren't, that's because you haven't spent as much time trying to use them as you did with Windows.
Is Unix or Linux more difficult for most people? Yes because most people who start working with a computer start off with Windows.

Linux is not bad on the desk top, but server side is still absolute junk.

Huh? Linux is far and formost an os for servers, next for desktops. Last week i've setup my Linux server as a PDC using samba. Piece of cake and i now allows my XP to register with the domain and load/save stuf to the linux server. This is only a small example. I'm not saying that in your case it's not the best tool but Linux has a lot of good alternatives to Windows programs and to this day it's still more stable than Windows as a server although recent Version of Windows tend to be very stable also.

FreeBSD is the worst of the lot.

So it seems. I haven't used it so i cannot comment on my own experiences but i've heard other people say that it can be a pain to install a BSD server.

And in the enterprise, open source is not free and often it is hard if not imposable to insure.

Open soure allows companies to sell the source. You can take an open source program and sell it but you have to provide the source code. Why would this be a problem. And insuring program code? I have never heard about this before.

Anyway, to me, you do not come across unbiased when talking about Windows vs Linux vs Unix. I've worked with Linux and i've worken with Windows and to me, they both have their strengths.

[Thermodyne]

If I seem to be pro MS, then it is because I am a realist. Hey, I don’t love them, but I don’t hate them either. Personally, I think American business could take a few lessons from them. Cost cutting and job outsourcing might look good for the next dividend, but it is a poor substitute for actually going out and making money. And I also think that MS could benefit from listening to their customers a little more.

As for what Linux can do, can it deliver a single set of office apps (same suit for every user, office xp in this case) to 500 plus clients in 28 locations? Clients are 486’s through P4-2.4c’s, and run win 3.1, 9x, 2k, and XP? It also has to deliver 2 UNIX apps and a web based Sequel app. All processing has to take place on the servers, do to the limited abilities of the older systems and TC’s with current software. It also has to support about 100 thin clients from the same servers. Tech support is limited to 1 tech per 125 systems (actually it never gets better than 1/200), and because of distances, 75 percent of service calls need to be handled remotely. Each user gets the same desktop based on what group they are in. And to access the UNIX apps, trust relationships need to exist with two disjointed NT domains. Also, any location needs to be able to access resources, such as printers, in any office. Then toss in domain wide security, backups, web mirrors and Email just for kicks. Now, you get two of the 5 techs to run the servers, 1 of them for the wan and firewall, and two to support the rest. Of course it also has to do the normal domain stuff too.

Also, do to the limited amount of bodies, new features must already be proven out in the real world. Testing on site is very limited. Then just to make life unbearable, management approval lead time is often 18 to 24 months. Not to mention that the approved equipment/software list come from above and is politically influenced (here it is, use it).

[minipol]

Wow, your departement is understaffed! And because of it, it seems as if you haven't got a lot of time to learn new stuff. Anyway, it's a very spread out company if they have 28 locations and about 500 clients. That's roughly 18 workstations per location. And running such old hardware. I have been a sys admin in the past but boy my job was easier than this. 2 locations, some 60 clients and i had time to study.

[Thermodyne]

It’s a division of a state government. We deliver entitlement services, so most of our funding is spent before the ink is dry on the budget. Some of our offices have three systems and the new trend is offices with one system. Average is prolly 10 systems per field office, with the balance here at the main facility. Only thing served up in the field offices is anti-virus, and that is delivered from XP systems. All of the other servers are located here in the data center. Citrix farm is up to 7 quad processor units now. Big new push on now is disaster “resistance”. So the next few IT budgets will go to setting up remote locations for the server farms.

As to not studying, that would not be true. But most of my time is spent on security issues. I actually still have an AS300 in the data center, but unless the budget needs to be amended, it has done its Last piece of work. I also run some Redhat at home, but it is not in the same class as XP IMHO. And with what XP costs me, I don’t se any reason to abandon it.