ActiveMac - The Most Activated mac Resource

ActiveMac

User Controls

New User

Edit/View My Profile

ActiveMac

Articles

Forums

Links

News

News Search

Reviews

News Centers

Windows/Microsoft

DVD

ActiveHardware

Xbox

MaINTosh

News Search

ANet Chats

The Lobby

Special Events Room

Developer's Lounge

XBox Chat

FAQ's

Windows 98/98 SE

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows "Whistler" XP

Windows CE

Internet Explorer 6

Internet Explorer 5

Xbox

DirectX

DVD's

TopTechTips

Registry Tips

Windows 95/98

Windows 2000

Internet Explorer 4

Internet Explorer 5

Windows NT Tips

Program Tips

Easter Eggs

Hardware

DVD

Latest Reviews

Applications

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Norton SystemWorks 2002

Hardware

Intel Personal Audio Player 3000

Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer

Site News/Info

About This Site

Affiliates

ANet Forums

Default Home Page

Link To Us

Links

Member Pages

Site Search

Awards

Credits
�1997/2004, Active Network. All Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by Designer Dream. Content written by the Active Network team. Please click here for full terms of use and restrictions or read our Privacy Statement.

Microsoft Lab Works Overtime for Open-Source Edge

Time: 09:31 EST/14:31 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: John Quigley

Though outward appearances may indicate that Google Inc. is now Microsoft Corp.'s biggest threat, customers should not kid themselves. Microsoft still has many of its top minds working on the previous holders of that title: Linux and open source. At its Linux and Open Source Lab in Redmond, Wash., Microsoft has a three-pronged attack to give customers and potential customers more information by testing and comparing Windows and Linux in legacy environments, the effectiveness of each platform's security patching process, and how well Microsoft is working to integrate or support open-source code in its products.

Write Comment
Return to News

Displaying 1 through 25 of 167
Last | Next

The time now is 1:32:11 PM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us

#1 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/30/2006 9:48:51 AM

Three-pronged attack:

1. Use bought-&-paid-for FUD from partners to show that Windows is better, stronger, faster than anything in the Universe, but especially Linux (see MS' "Get The FUD" website).

2. Use bought-&-paid-for politicians to put pressure on anyone considering the benefits of using open source software, or anything that doesn't favour MS (see State of Mass. & ODF, various Eu cities planned & aborted Linux migrations, etc).

3. Use bought-&-paid-for journalists to plant stories about how wonderful Windows is, compared to how nasty Linux is (see Rob Enderle and Laura DiDio, David Coursey, etc).

#2 By 23278 (12.11.161.5) at 1/30/2006 9:53:13 AM

What size tin foil hat do you wear, Latch?

#3 By 8556 (12.217.111.92) at 1/30/2006 10:13:22 AM

Latch: I appreciate the quality of most Linux distros. However, here on Earth customers that use their computers for business purposes demand Windows, even when Linux will do the job for them. Call it superstition. But, Windows is like a religion for small and medium business customers. Asking them to try Linux is like asking a fervent believer in any faith to switch religions to save on the weekly collection plate donations. They just don't care. $140 per PC for Windows is nothing to them. Linux causes their eyes to glaze over when explained or demonstrated. As long as MS keeps improving Windows they will keep ruling the OS world.

This post was edited by bobsireno on Monday, January 30, 2006 at 10:19.

#4 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/30/2006 10:59:47 AM

#3: Agreed, lamentably. And it's this very inertia that will keep MS chugging along for many years to come.

#5 By 32132 (142.32.208.231) at 1/30/2006 11:39:14 AM

#1 Hmmm. I thought it was OSS fanatics plying state officials with free trips to Japan, Puerto Rico and other nice vacation spots and then lying and claiming that patent encumbered software like PDF and ODF were "open".

If Sun has a patent on ODF and Adobe has Patents on PDF they are NOT OPEN.

Redefining the word OPEN to mean "WE HATE MICROSOFT" is moronic.

But of course Latch, you've always worked hard at being a moron.

#6 By 32132 (142.32.208.231) at 1/30/2006 11:41:01 AM

#1 Has Munich converted one desktop yet? Is that FUD?

Why do "journalists" pimp Apache 2.x as secure when it has 10 times the security holes as IIS 6?

The OSS world is full of lies and FUD.

This post was edited by NotParker on Monday, January 30, 2006 at 11:41.

#7 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 1/30/2006 8:12:24 PM

latch,

i'll go ahead and say it. linux sucks!

if you spend forever tweeking it, linux sorta runs, but god forbid that you have a problem. yep, its back to the news groups to search for hours for the answer to your problem.

no business on earth without a full time linux specialist would even dream of using it on the desktop.

could some linux idiot please explain to me how an rpm file even works.

i guess i just don�t get it. after using this program i find the apps buggy, the OS slow and ugly. the only thing to say for it is that it is free.

by the way latch, getting a running old ford for free doesn�t make it a good car. i�ve got some advice for you, buy a proper os from apple or ms and get something that actually works. over the life of your computer the cost of the os is money well spent.

#8 By 23278 (24.147.235.53) at 1/30/2006 8:53:56 PM

I'm with ya oldog. My college's linux lab was always in need of tweaking and could never quite do everything it needed to do. It seemed like our proffesor spent more time trying to figure out why something with linux would work on one computer but then not work or another. The Windows labs were fine, of course.

#9 By 1845 (67.172.237.188) at 1/30/2006 11:41:50 PM

Is ad hominem the only method you have for defending Windows, doggie?

I guess google.com and amazon.com only sorta run. I guess akamai's caching services (used by Microsoft among others) only sorta run.

Are you honestly claiming that so many businesses that have adopted Linux have never noticed that it doesn't actually meet their needs? Next you'll tell me that the reason the US invaded Iraq had nothing to do with finding weapons of mass destruction.

#10 By 12071 (203.214.147.215) at 1/31/2006 5:20:09 AM

#7 Have you tried using Ubuntu? (http://www.ubuntu.com/). You can download a Live CD if you just want to try it out without having to screw around with multiple OS' if you don't have VMWare. I'll be suprised if you need to spend forever tweaking it as it's as simple to use as any other OS.

"could some linux idiot please explain to me how an rpm file even works."
Similar to how an MSI file works - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPM_Package_Manager

#11 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/31/2006 9:47:57 AM

#7: so you don't like Linux because you don't know what you're doing with it? That's understandable and normal. It takes a little patience to learn something new. Linux is not Windows, so don't expect it to behave like Windows. And no, you don't need to tweak it forever, or even at all. And if you do run into a problem, use forums like this one, search Google & Google Groups, etc just like you would if you had a Windows problem.

#12 By 20505 (64.60.114.101) at 1/31/2006 10:41:59 AM

#9

does amazon or google for that matter run linux on their desktops? i highly doubt it.

#10

is ubuntu faster or easier than xp? sorry, i'll stick with xp. (and i bet you will too on most of your machines).

#11

how long to you have to hold your nose and swallow crap before you realize that it just doesn't taste very good. by the way, my dog on the other hand would disagree with me, he seems to love to eat the stuff.

#13 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 1/31/2006 11:34:56 AM

"Are you honestly claiming that so many businesses that have adopted Linux have never noticed that it doesn't actually meet their needs?"

Have you noticed that server market share shows a very large increase for Windows, while the combined Linux/Unix market share has dropped?

Yes, Linux market share on servers has increased, but at the expense of Unix. Businesses are getting rid of the more expensive proprietary Unix servers and replacing them with Windows and Linux.

Linux = bargain basement Unix

As for Linux on the desktop ... it peaked in the middle of last year and will continue to decline.

#14 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 1/31/2006 11:37:44 AM

"Next you'll tell me that the reason the US invaded Iraq had nothing to do with finding weapons of mass destruction."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/26/115712.shtml?s=ic

"The former number two official in Saddam Hussein's Iraqi air force claims the former Iraqi dictator moved weapons of mass destruction from Iraq to Syria in the months preceding the current Iraq war.

Georges Sada revealed the charges in an interview Wednesday with the New York Sun. They are detailed in his new book, "Saddam�s Secrets.�

"Saddam realized, this time, the Americans are coming," Sada told the Sun. "They handed over the weapons of mass destruction to the Syrians.�

The former Iraqi general said Special Republican Guard brigades loaded WMDs onto two converted Iraqi Airways planes."

Cocincidentally, this came just after Sentaor Jay Rockefellers trip to the Middle East where he warned several countires leaders that the US planned to invade Iraq.

This post was edited by NotParker on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 at 11:40.

#15 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 1/31/2006 3:33:41 PM

#14: How did I just know you were a Bushie? Maybe your proclivity to believe anything MS says.

#16 By 7754 (65.27.90.2) at 1/31/2006 3:45:11 PM

#15, then there's you, who believes nothing that Microsoft says. How is that different?

#17 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 1/31/2006 4:41:25 PM

#12 "is ubuntu faster or easier than xp? sorry, i'll stick with xp."
Easier is a difficult to quantify as it depends on what you've been using for the last 10 years! If you've been using Windows then you'll find OS X, Linux etc difficult because they don't function identically to what you are used to. That doesn't mean they are harder, just shows that you need to learn any OS when trying to use it for the first time - it's not as if you sat down in front of Windows one day with no knowledge of OS' and were suddenly a "power user". So you're coming from an OS which you are comfortable with after having x years of experience using it, giving an alternate OS a go for a short period of time, finding that you're no longer the "power user" you thought you were and calling the OS crap. And the same is true of those users who have used a Mac or Linux for a long time.

#14 We can settle this once and for all without pasting people's opinions about what might have happened to the non-existant WMD's - Just tell us where they are! If IRAQ posed such an immitent threat to the world, if the gov agencies had all these satellite photo's of all the mobile statations etc etc... just tell us where they are. Show the world where they are? It can't be that hard if you have so much evidence for it! ... Unless of course you made it all up and there are no WMD!

#18 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 1/31/2006 8:36:11 PM

"Unless of course you made it all up and there are no WMD"

The Kurds, Shiites and Iranians who were gassed by Saddam wish that there had been no WMD's.

"Just tell us where they are!"

Syria.

"One of the most troubling and intriguing theories has been the idea that Hussein smuggled them to Syria or some other nation before the war began. Now Nizar Nayyouf, an exiled Syrian journalist now living in Paris, claims to have contact with a Syrian military intelligence official who is confirming that theory.

Speaking to the British television station ITN Friday, Nayyouf said that his source says he knows three sites where Iraq's WMDs are kept.

It has been confirmed that the Iraqi weapons which were smuggled into Syria through the intermediary of Colonel Zu Alhima Shalish are now located in three different places," the Syrian source reportedly wrote in Arabic to Nayyouf. "The first of these places is a tunnel on the mountain slope near the village of Baida, which is situated two kilometers from Misyaf. This place is under the jurisdiction of Department 489, which deals with coded messages and documents."

"The second of these places is a factory owned by the air force in the village of Tal Sinan, which is situated between the two cities of Hamma and Salmiyah. The third of these places is the town of Shinshar, which is situated 40 kilometers to the south of Hums and 3 kilometers to the east of the Damascus-Hums highway. There are underground tunnels there, which belong to Brigade 661 of the air force. This is a reconnaissance force. These tunnels are several meters deep."

Nayyouf's source contends that the weapons, likely missile parts and chemicals, were transferred in large wooden boxes and barrels, under the supervision of Colonel Zu Alhima Shalish and his nephew Assef, who works for the Albashair Company, which is owned by the Assads and has offices in Beirut, Damascus, and Baghdad. The source says that this company was also responsible for the smuggling of Iraqi oil to Syria and providing weapons to Saddam's regime."

http://www.nationalreview.com/geraghty/geraghty200401120834.asp

#19 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 1/31/2006 9:40:31 PM

#18 "theories"
Ok, maybe I wasn't explicit enough, can you provide facts not tinhat theories and conspiracies?

And if you know where the WMD's are... why aren't you invading (I mean freeing) Syria? You even know the locations of all 3 sites... how hard can it be to find the non-existance WMD's that the government manufactured evidence for?

#20 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 2/1/2006 12:45:54 AM

The dead Shiites, Kurds and Iranians killed by poison gas and nerve gas on the orders of Saddam Hussein were not "manufactured".

You remind of the people who deny the holocaust took place.

#21 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 2/1/2006 1:12:36 AM

#20 I never said that Iraq never had any WMD's... stop trying to put words in my mouth and answer my questions. I said that when the US government manufactured evidence to lie to the American people and the World, Iraq did not have any WMD's. And you are yet to provide ANY evidence to the contrary! In fact, a majority of the American people and the rest of the World are still waiting for ANY evidence to the contrary! They will most likely be waiting forever as those damn non-existant invisible WMD's just can't be found!

"You remind of the people who deny the holocaust took place."
You remind me of the people who manufacture evidence to invade a country based on historical evidence, trying to present it as current evidence. The kind of people who ignore the US foreign policy and what it has done historically but are more than happy to point the finger at what everyone else has done historically.

Start invading Syria if you know the WMD's are there... prove to the World you weren't lying through your teeth when you presented all the evidence showing what an imminent threat Iraq was to the entire World!

#22 By 15406 (216.191.227.68) at 2/1/2006 8:35:48 AM

#21: Why are you wasting your time arguing with Parkkker?

#23 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 2/1/2006 9:25:57 AM

#21 "I never said that Iraq never had any WMD's"

Since when did any mass murdering dictator ever give up WMD's. He hid them from the UN inspectos and then he moved them to Syria when war approached.

" I said that when the US government manufactured evidence to lie to the American people and the World, Iraq did not have any WMD's."

Every other major western country had the same evidence and came to the same conclusions.

Bill Clinton lobbed dozens of cruise missiles at Iraq because of the same intelligence.

The French came to the same conclusions. The only difference is that Saddam bribed the French and Germans and the UN to do nothing.

And morons who denigrate and deny Saddam used WMD's to murder hundreds of thousands continue to demand he be put back in power to kill even more. People like you miss his bounty on jews.

#24 By 32132 (64.180.219.241) at 2/1/2006 9:26:27 AM

#25 By 7754 (65.27.90.2) at 2/1/2006 10:34:38 AM

#21 "the US government manufactured evidence"--don't rewrite history. As Hussein's nuclear physicist in charge of the centrifuge program attests, Iraq's nuclear ambitions were only held up by the UN inspectors--once they left, it would have started again. He had buried the detailed plans under a lotus tree in his garden, ordered by Saddam under penalty of death. What we do know:

The questionable report--most likely originally from MI6, not US intelligence, for what it's worth--was that Iraq purchased 500 tons of yellowcake uranium from Niger between 1999 and 2001. This could be used to make fuel for nuclear reactors, or it could be enriched to make weapons-grade uranium. The intelligence report was widely discredited... however, we knew before the war that 500 tons of uranium was at Al-Tuwaitha, and 1.8 tons was enriched, although not yet to the degree necessary for making a weapon. The 1.8 tons was shipped out of Iraq after the war.

The real scary part here is that the US should have found Iraq's nuclear scientists as quickly as possible after the war and brought them out of that region of the world. Instead, now they are in places like Syria. But make no mistake, Iraq had clear nuclear intentions:

"Although Saddam never had nuclear weapons at his disposal, the story of how close Iraq came to developing them should serve as a red flag to the international community." - Dr. Mahdi Obeidi, Iraq's physicist in charge of its centrifuge program

and the intentions shown in Bush's 2003 State of the Union address were to stop Iraq before it had nuclear weapons, before the threat was imminent. They were clearly pursuing nuclear weapons, they were clearly in breach of UN resolution 1441, and the world is better off without Saddam Hussein in control of Iraq. If Hans Blix before the war had personally dug up that cache of documents in Dr. Obeidi's garden--the ones detailing Iraq's nuclear program--what do you think the response would have been then? After all, Iraq was supposed to provide voluntarily "...an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction...."

Write Comment
Return to News

Displaying 1 through 25 of 167
Last | Next

The time now is 1:32:11 PM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us