Topic: The revolution has arrived.

[Nemesis]

Nem,

I'm not sure I've ever said MS is better or worse. I have said I prefer MS products over Linux, but no were I have said one is superior over the other as you have asserted many many times. An assertion I believe to be patently false. OSs are like tools, cars, and women (or men if that is the reader's choice), in that each has its strengths and weaknesses.

Jerry

On security I believe that Linux is superiour.  Mainly because Linux is based on the Unix specification which includes security from the ground up, whereas Windows was designed without security until after internet access was added.  Then they began to add security but only where profitable to do so.  They rely too much on the security by obscurity model, which fails as soon as your code escapes, which has happened to Winodws.

I don't recall ever asserting that Linux was superior overall.  If it was I would not be posting this from a Windows 2000 Pro system (using Firefox for browsing).  I have said that I won't be buying anymore Microsoft products so long as they maintain the activation system and try to control what I may do with my computer and my legal copy of Windows.  There are ways in which Microsoft has superiourity, mostly (but not exclusively) as a result of the monopoly power they hold.   

I've attacked them for attempting to control my use of my property.  I've attacked them for their criminal acts both past and ongoing.  When they act with respect of the rights of others and within the law then I can go back to supporting them. 

I think it is better for computer users and the computer industry (and ultimately the entire economy) if Microsoft is dethroned.  They have concentrated too much power in their hands and they abuse that power. 

[Javora]

What Nemesis said including the Win2000/Firefox (Mozilla) bit, and he said it better than I probably could have.   

[toasty0]

Ok, I'll but some of your argument.

Tangential to this, have you looked at DotNetNuke? I like it so far as an open source portal software. Been futzing around with it at http://www.toasty0.net and http://www.DotNetGroup.org

Jerry

[GE-Raven]

As a network administrator I will tell you how Microsoft (granted we run a Novell Network) is superior...

Stadardization... The fact of the matter is that people inherently "know" Microsoft and it is a lot eaiser on an organization to use it.  When you talk of security sure Linux is safer... but the very reason for that is the same one Mac had for years.There aren't enough user's to make viruses/expolits/etc... worth it to the malcontents that write them.  Factor in the fact that almost all people who use linux are faiirly advanced computer users (in other words microsoft is "child's play" to them) and it stands to reason that their inherent skills (as a whole) make it more likely that any patches, fixes, etc... will be applied. 

Those who prey on computers want massive numbers of stupid people (ignorant would be a better term) who not only allow the machine to be vulnerable but also are unlikely to detect the problems that are caused.  More over they certainly will have little ability to fix the problems.  While it is certainly tougher to "hack" the Linux box, that difficulty is disproportionate to the difficulty in use to the average joe user.  So from my "support" standpoint, I don't much care if the box is safer if it is virtually unuseable to the office it is assigned.

At the end of the day it is kind of like the Porche vs. Vette arguements.  While there is no doubt in my mind a porches is a far "superior" driving machine.  90% of the population will be able to go faster in a Vette, because it is easy to do so.

GE-Raven

[Bonk]

I just hope the Fedora/Redhat line (and similar distributions that want money ultimately) does not dominate and continue on it's current MS like path of bloating and sloppy development... or we'll be no better off.

Which of course is the advantage of open source.  There are always alternatives. 

Debian, Gentoo, Xandros, Lycoris, Yggdrasil, Slackware, SUSE and many more.   You don't even have to stay x86 if you don't want to.  Given the right skill set you can even create your own.

Right, but the thing is that Fedora/Redhat is the most popular because it is the easiest one to use includes the most drivers and is most like windows (but less stable).

I am a fan of the purer Unix-like OSs like FreeBSD or QNX... they tend not to bloat in that windows/redhat style and are far more efficient and secure.

If I were going to go linux I'd use Slackware, but I see linux as a trend, just like windows was, any OS that becomes very popular will eventually suffer from the same problems.  (like making concessions to run on cheap dell-like hardware...)

If FreeBSD will run on it and recognise all the hardware, it is a quality PC; if not, corners have been cut and you'll be better off with Linux or Windows which accounts for substandard hardware. (and therein lie their problems)