Boy, nothing like world vs Micro$oft story to draw a crowd.

Yeah hi, just wonderin' if we could possibly grow up with the "$" in Microsoft? K? Thanks.

I will second that. Putting the dollar sign in Microsoft really makes no sense. I am wodering why people do it. Do they think they are insulting Microsoft? They aren't. It is about as effective as calling Karl Marx or Lenin a communist to insult them. They are communists, so calling them a communist would be a compliment to them, not an insult as it would to capitalists such as myself.

$o I write Micro$oft. $ue me!!!

Hey, don't cry man, it'$ only a dollar $ign

If you live in America, it's quite likely someone will. I'm sure a good enough (read: well paid) lawyer could start with defamation and go from there.

Not bloody possible. There's nothing defamatory in those posts. No lawyer is that good. ...yes: this statement is still not defamatory. :-)

Edited for the "$" challenged:

"Not bloody po$$ible. There'$ nothing defamatory in tho$e po$t$. No lawyer i$ that good. ...ye$: thi$ $tatement i$ $till not defamatory. :-)

I'm convinced that "Anti-Microsofties" cant even see an "S" unless formatted in the "$" style. Maybe we could use this deficiency as a "$ecret Code"?

For your info, I'm not anti Micro$oft. [couldn't resist] :-)

I run Windows 2000 Server and a bunch of Micro$oft apps [:-)] - could care less for anything else right now. Don't get $o worked up about it.

You were picked on on the playground a lot, weren't you.. :-P heh heh

Umm No, but I'm certain that you were.....

LOL, no. :-)

http://www.insanepictures.com/jk.shtml?1258.htm

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104-864256.html

NICE! Thx

Can't wait to hear the "re-fewt" of this one.........

did you read the whole article? its near the bottom where linus trivolds explains open source.

*Blush* umm, yeah {:-0

BUT, ease of use has had it's price....

They *used* to concentrate on that ONLY, now they will backtrack and fix the *important* stuff

I really do hope that someday a Unix based OS comes out that is easy to use AND has a kick a** GUI. Trust me, I'll use it when it does....maybe not for my main OS, but I will use it.

BTW, whats with the GUI in FreeBSD? I've heard of problems from some people. I haven't installed it yet or even burned the ISO. Can I even get the GUI to work?

Kick a** GUI..

Example Shots:
http://kde-look.org/content/preview.php?file=1172-1.png
http://www.kde.org/scree...s/kde300beta2shots.html
http://www.kde-look.org/...iew.php?file=1091-1.png

GUIs (Complete Desktops)
http://www.ximian.com
http://www.kde.org

GUIs (Windowing Environments err "Shells")
http://fluxbox.sourceforge.net
http://www.windowmaker.org
http://www.xfce.org

Tons more info:
http://www.plig.org/xwinman/

Thx fewt

I think the article presents a good view on both perspectives. I think that in reality, we need both open source and closed source paradigms. Open source is particularly valuable in scientific research, or any other type of learning\knowledge sharing scenarios.

I really don't think this is a debate that will ever bear a winner. I mean what’s the eventuality open source proponents can hope for? Microsoft opens the code for Windows? Apple opens all their source? Everyone lives in this harmonious world where code is freely available to anyone with a net connection? To think even anything close to this is being highly naive and not even close to being practical. There'd be no motivation for corporations to create something new, because some college geek will make something even better and then give it away for free.

The only innovation we'd see is that from universities or lone hackers with too much time on their hands. I doubt any of this would be very useful for consumers.

Both have their part to play in the yin and yang of development and business.

FreeBSD's focus has always been on servers. Unlike Linux, they aren't under the false impression that they can make a decent desktop OS so they are sticking to what *nix was made for, servers.

I know what you're going to say Fewt.

that Ximian desktop product looks pretty nice, I guess tomorrow I'll be loading up some Linux and trying it out

What am I going to say? Actually I agree with that. One note, Linux *IS* making progress to the desktop because people want it there. FreeBSD will ride along, as it is Linux compatable in a sense.

I concur. However, although the Ximian desktop shown in the link below is by far the most "Kick Ass" desktop for *nix* OS's, it still falls WAY short of Windows XP's "beauty".

http://www.ximian.com/im...esktop/desktop_naut.png

As someone else posted, the GUI shoud be INCLUDED in the kernel as in Windows OS's instead of being seperate from it. Both KDE's and Ximian's "artists" should be FIRED or if they are not "paid", they should be removed from development until they get some lessons in graphics design. If it is decided that the GUI be left out of the kernel, the artwork should be redesigned at the very least. This is the basic problem with the *look* of *nix* OS's desktops. They are, in a word "cumbersome" and FAR from the "pretty" look of XP. This isn't meant to be overly harsh but if these desktops ever expect to compete with Windows, they need a makeover BIG TIME.

Yeah, if you want XFree86 on BSD you can always use OpenBSD

huh? I've used XFree86 on FreeBSD..

The GUI shouldn't ever be in the kernel. GUI hooks maybe for direct access, but that's there now.

That's why Windows GUI is much more responsive than Linux. Linux does not intend to put any more GUI stuffs in the kernel than necessary to protect stabilty.

Windows integrates more of the GUI into the kernel which results in more speed, but the GUI can take the system down. It can't (well when it does you can telnet/ssh in) take out the system in Linux

I'd settle for a standard 'start menu' type system. Not to mention graphical installers. I constantly have terminal windows open in order to be speedy and productive... in the 21st century, as Microsoft have proven, you shouldn't have to see a command prompt very often.

All this time, and *still* programs don't install their own icons... unless you're using Mandrake (yuck) with KDE, and RPM packages that are specifically written for Mandrake.

As with Linux it gives you XFree86 and your choice of window manager. In the installer, it gives you a choice between KDE, GNOME, fvwm and a few others.

Oh well, I'll say it instead :)

I'm happily running FreeBSD as a desktop. It's true that it's intended for servers and doesn't strive to be a desktop OS, but it's capable of being one as a side-effect of Linux's popularity (all the nice things like KDE get ported).

Obviously, since it's not designed for the average desktop type person, it doesn't have any pretty installers or GUIs like Mandrake for instance. So no, I wouldn't recommend it as an OS for your Joe Average at all.

On the positive side, it seems like the next step once you know enough about the *NIX ways of doing things. If others go the same path as me, they start out with Redhat or Mandrake. Then they get to know their way around it and try something like Slackware (realising how nice it is not to be frustrated over RPM dependencies and such). Then, now that they know their way around and are no longer afraid of the command prompt, they go on to Debian or FreeBSD and have the best of both worlds.

I find BSD and Debian far less frustrating, as both have a sensible directory structure and installers that solve their own dependencies. I prefer FreeBSD out of the two because Debian is so heavily against non-GPL software that it's very difficult to find some non-free packages for it. I also love the choice between binary packages and source ports, *both* of which resolve their own deps. Basically, FreeBSD is to me like a Linux for those who know their way around it, and are frustrated at things like RPMs. Perfectly capable as a desktop :)

I'll agree that it's not there yet, however every application I've installed lately (Crossover, WPO 2000, Erics Ultimate Solitaire, etc) all installed icons for both GNOME and KDE.

OS X is UNIX with A nice GUI

Re: Microsoft and Standards Posted by Ender
on March 21st, 2002 at 8:54AM ET

Whatever happened to fair competition? Whatever happened to not using your monopoly for illegal acts?

Re: Microsoft and Standards Posted by Compdoc
on March 21st, 2002 at 9:07AM ET

It's more like:

Whatever happened to the government staying out of free trade? Isn't this why we fought the Revolutionary War against England? The Sherman Anti-Trust Act/"law" is Anti-American, Anti Competitive, Anti-Capitalism and many other HORRIBLE things. It is also a REALLY good excuse for Communistic/Socialistic individuals and companies to "cry foul" when their s***ty products can't compete with Capitalistic individuals and companies.

"fair competition" is for China, NOT the US. We here in the US believe that if you want to win in business that you "Bust yer ass", NOT "Sue yer ass"...............

its a combo. its a game of chess. to win, you have to win from all angles. gates is a great puppeteer(sp). he's played the industry for a long time and will continue to dominate where ever no ones paying attention.

No denying that but the govt. needs to STAY OUT of biz.

BTW, I wouldn't pick on your spelling, only those who post un-intelligent or *personal attack* replies :)

A true communist way of thinking.

Read My Struggle (The Road Ahead) by Bill Gates.

Sieg Heil, Genosse.

If I'm not mistaken, and I'm NOT, "Sieg Heil" or rather "Zeig Heil" is a fascist, NOT communist phrase.

And Bill Gates is FAR from a communist! Bill Gates and MS are Absolute Capitalists. The commies ALWAYS try to call their enemies the real commies to deceive people from the truth and take societies eyes off themselves.

Just look at the OS's:

Windows is Capitalist

Linux, NOT Unix, BSD or other *nix* OS's, is communist.

And how may is ask is "the govt. needs to STAY OUT of biz" in ANY way communist? In communist countries, the government is VERY involved in business, EVERY aspect for that matter.

You sir, are a jack ass......

Excellent post, my sentiments exactly. Those confusing your post with communism need to seriously go back to middle school and do some reading on government. Linux and its whole ideology which follows is much truer to communism than anything else I see floating around.

Communism: A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

Capitalism: An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.

Thanks, I don't do bad when I keep my emotions to a minimum :)

"We here in the US believe that if you want to win in business that you "Bust yer ass", NOT "Sue yer ass"............... "

Could have fooled me.
Sppire.

Bussiness is like a game and like every game it has rules. If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. If you break these rules, the referee will bust you.
Microsoft has been playing a very nasty game for the last couple of years and has been getting away with it. Now they're busted,they're the ones that are crying foul play. Isn't the world ironic.

Like I said, "The Sherman Anti-Trust Act/"law" is Anti-American, Anti Competitive, Anti-Capitalism and many other HORRIBLE things."

Our nation lost many good men during the Revolutionary War in fighting England's repression of our free market. It seems to me that in light of the Anti-Trust law which this country now employs, they died in vain............

No, our ancestors fought to end taxation.

Which stemmed from Englands desire to destroy our free trade.........

We were making better products at cheaper prices which caused JEALOUSY by the crown and well, you know the rest........

Our capitalist system had not yet been established. I was under the impression that England was simply doing as it did to all of it's people. ;-)

Yes, but they had already started to enjoy a relative amount of "freedom" from mother England as they were so far away from massive amounts of British "stormtroopers". It was only when we started getting some "balls" that England started sending more troops over to "keep us in line". You know the old saying, "Give 'em an inch........" Well, they liked this newfound "inch" and they took the mile........

To be honest, the way things have turned out in this country, we would have been better off never fighting the Revolution as we have lost "almost" everything we fought for at that time. Our Founding Fathers must be rolling over in their graves...........................

http://wired.com/news/an...st/0,1551,51202,00.html

"The federal judge hearing the Microsoft antitrust case said particularly damaging testimony (from RealNetworks) against the company is hearsay, and refused to consider it in deciding whether nine states can impose harsh penalties on the company."

I wonder how many pieces of testimony from other Anti-MS companies are hearsay?

BTW NULLedge, thanks for the link.

That would be as many that have had overturned cases in court.

True

Guess that last post was a *bit* too much :-D

nothin's bitin' today.........

In any event, AOL really does ruin everything they get their hands on.......no need to expound

bbl, gotta change me lure :-D

i'd put money on the fact you use winamp, aim, icq, or any other of their *ruined* software

Nope, I use Trillian :)

trillian plays your mp3s?

And I HATE the fact that E-bay is owned by them but I had an account before they were bought out.

No, that would be WMP :) I just responded to the IM part. Sorry :)

I resent that comment, Winamp is still a great software. It has a small memory footprint and seems to work fine. AIM has always been ruined, it plain sucks. ICQ I agree with you on. That used to be a nifty ware, but now it isn't worth the 20+ megs of RAM it eats up.

I too use Trillian.

I saw quite a bit of debate saying that Microsoft should open this and that. As far as Office is concerned, any Office document be it excel, powerpoint, or word, can be exported as an HTML document. .NET is wholly based around open standards like XML and SOAP. Even the MSN Messenger protocol has been opened (unlike AOL). I think this shows Microsoft is going into that direction.

I had the most hilarious conversation with a person who actually holds a high IT position in his department. He said he was going with java for a web service they're doing because they wanted something more open and non-proprietary. It's this kind of misinformation I hate. Java is not standard, it is VERY much proprietary, and has NEVER been submitted to a standards body.

.NET on the other hand has been submitted to a standards body (note the existence of projects like Mono) and is open (fully standard XML and SOAP).

..and since I'm on misconceptions about Java. One I hear all the time from even experience programmers is ye olde saying "Well Java is platform independent!".

Java is not platform indepenent as Sun's marketing department likes to say over and over. Java runs on Sun's virtual machine (a platform). Even this VM has to be ported initially to any new operating systems. Porting indicates a java program can't be executed 'out of the box' on a brand new OS. Is this platform independence?...uh, no? It so happens the VM has been ported to the major operating systems around today, thus giving the illusion of independence. For that matter then, .NET will be platform independent, right? Last I heard on project Mono was that C# was compiling everything on it's own - without the need for Windows. Sun is scared, very scared.

.NET will not be considered fully open until it is not protected by patent law. Your high paid IT friend was correct in his choice.

Very well stated. Sun should be scared. Scott Mcmealymouth's envy has put him in a very bad position along with his company. It goes to show you what happens to a company run by emotions............

And so Java is not patented? Whats up with all this lawsuit stuff?

what the hell happened to the java processors they were working on. they had some sort of on board chip they were working on to run java code natively to any system with it installed. that might have been neat i guess. maybe someone figured out that firmware updates would be to costly or something. :\ oh well. whatever. that language is too high maintenance in my opinion. Finding people to code all the crap its supposed to be capable of is near impossible and with shockwave flash where it is today theres really no way it can compete asthetically to other crossplatform formats. (i might be talking outov my ass. i dunno if shockwave supports linux/bsd/unix yet)

I remember hearing about those "Java Buttons" or whatever they were supposed to be called. .Net will take over where these left off as they are already planning this type of access with Mira and it's little consoles all over your home. I would venture to say that the devices will eventually be as small as keychains or maybe even tie tacks. MS is also working on voice enabled devices. Download the Microsoft Speech SDK. It has some sample apps that allow you to boss your PC around the way it was meant to be and is pretty good with accent's/tones once you go through the 15 minute training session.

There is native flash on Linux, as for shockwave it runs perfectly in wine.

Whats so wrong in having a patent for something you have created?

It can be used to leverage .NET which keeps it from being a truly open system.

Well, leverage is used in business every day. I don't think they will though. They have too much invested in .Net to risk another lawsuit.

The lawsuit is about breaking a contract, it has nothing to do with patents. Microsoft had the right to build a Java VM which had to pass certain tests to be able to have the Java label and is not allowed to have any proprietary stuff (i.e. it must obey that "write once, run anywhere" policy). Microsoft violated that license by adding Windows only functions which broke their VM.
Do your homework!

Fewt, THAT lawsuit was already settled, done, and over with. The "new" lawsuit by Sun has nothing to do with the old Java- it is mainly about MS NOT including Java "out of the box" for XP. Now, isn't that just a really STUPID thing to sue over? There is no contract out that states MS *must* include Sun Java with XP, so they didn't. So, Sun wants to sue over that, and *force* MS to include Sun's Java.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputewizard.com

Check out http://www.sun.com/lawsuit/ and get your facts straight:

"In its complaint, Sun alleges that Microsoft has engaged in extensive anticompetitive conduct, including the following:

* Fragmenting the Java platform;
* Flooding the market with incompatible Java Runtime Environments;
* Forcing other companies to distribute or use products that are incompatible with Java;
* Significantly limiting Sun's distribution channels for the Java Runtime Environment;
* Intentionally interfering with the development of Java-based applications for compatible runtimes;
* Copyright infringement resulting from Microsoft's distribution of an unlicensed implementation of the Java Runtime Environment;
* Intentional creation of incompatibilities between Microsoft software and competing technologies, thereby raising switching costs for consumers and reducing consumer choice.
....
In its suit, Sun is seeking preliminary injunctions requiring Microsoft to:

* Distribute Sun's current binary implementation of the Java plug-in as part of Windows XP and Internet Explorer;
* Stop distribution of Microsoft's Java Virtual Machine through separate downloads."

Fact: Microsoft distributed a broken JVM.
Why? To destroy java as it's platform-independence is a threat for MS by using their long-time proven "embrace and extend" policy. They failed and now all of a sudden they don't need to put Java in their OS anymore. Then why did they have to put it in there in the first place? All MS has ever wanted to do is destroy Java by anti-competitive actions.
Why does Sun want their JVM bundled with XP and IE? MS has a near momopoly on the desktop and browser market. By bundling (or later downloading) of an old, incompatible JVM, MS is trying again to kill Java (I've can recall several problems with E-Banking-applets that only run on MS-JVM); it's the same as with IE-optimized web-sites. Why write 100%-pure. We'll just write for the largest group of people.
Is forcing them to include Sun's JVM the solution? That's up to the court to decide.

James, why did you address me in your reply to my post with Fewt? Do you actually read the posts and who posts them or are you blinded by all the Compdoc/Fewt "wars" that you consider every rebutal of your or one of your friends posts as an action of Fewt?

Sorry Ender; guess I had FEWT on the brain, hehe....
Trying to reply to postings, answer the phone, and having customers come in tends to sidetrack me at times. No offense intended.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

No problem James, I just don't like to be confused with Fewt. Sometimes I agree with him but a lot of the time I'm feeling he's to aggressive and not willing to listen to the opinions of the other posters (he'd rather bash them).

But if Java is the standard non-proprietary entity everyone is alluding to, the lawsuit could not be enforced because nobody would own it. It's like suing someone for changing HTML, or XML.

So back to the original point yet again, Java is not standard and is proprietary. .NET is also proprietary, however its interfaces (already standardized) as well as C# has at least been submitted to a standards body. Java has not.

Which of the two would be more standards oriented?

"Compdoc/Fewt "wars".........LOL! :-D

Just givin' him a run for his money :-D

Nothing personal...

"Fact: Microsoft distributed a broken JVM."
Not quite fact. Microsoft distributed a modified JVM which did not adhere to the "Write Once, Run Anywhere" logo. It wasn't broken. Everything you wrote in 'pure' Java was unaffected.

"All MS has ever wanted to do is destroy Java by anti-competitive actions."
MS actually wanted to work with Java... Sun wanted total dominance and control. For better or good at least let some facts through rather than spreading FUD.

"Why does Sun want their JVM bundled with XP and IE?"
Because they thought that users would flock to their website to download THEIR plug-in... and they got a rude shock when that did NOT occur! Sun were quite happy with MS not including a JVM with Windows... until now.

"Is forcing them to include Sun's JVM the solution? That's up to the court to decide."
Yes, we should let some judge decide wether or not Company A can force (read: sue) Company B to include their software.

Well said. Also, who cares if its installed or not? I mean how often have you had to go and download the JVM? I have once in like the last 3 years because I wanted to use Limewire. What about all those super fun drawing applets though? Or the bouncing balls? Or the rippling water effect found on so many Geocities websites?? How will we cope?

But I have to ask, if Microsoft is forced to distribute JVM, then they would have to distribute everything which both Microsoft and a competitor makes, right?

So Windows will now be 1000x more bloated. We get to have Realplayer installed, AOL, Lotus, Novell, Adobe editing wares, Netscape, Oracle..what else? I'm sure every ma and pa 5 man development shop with an imitation Microsoft product will deserve a cut too, yes? I mean thats not fair that small businesses can't compete with big bad Microsoft.

This is absurd folks. What ever happened to people innovating to compete instead of suing? I can already see this response coming: well whatever happened to not using underhanded tactics to compete? To that I say, re-read elementary american business practices and study history a little bit. It all boils down to how pleased the clients\customers are. If they like something, they pay for it. If not, they don't and you go make a better product. Not sue like some whiny little girl scout.

"What ever happened to people innovating to compete instead of suing?"
I'd hate to say it but America happened.... where it seems that if you can't get what you want you can always sue - no matter how obsurd and idiotic it may be.

True, but that could be said of other posters here, too.
That's the main reason that I don't post anywhere nearly as often as I used to. It seemed that no matter how fiercely I argued any point with others, it would not change anyone's opinion on whatever matter we were arguing.

"Java is not platform indepenent"
Of course it is!

"Java runs on Sun's virtual machine (a platform)."
Well it runs on *any* virtual machine that follows the spec, not necessarily just Sun's.

"Even this VM has to be ported initially..."
Correct...the VM is not platform independent, but Java (as in the language) is! As long as someone writes a virtual machine that is to specifications on Operating System XYZ, all my java code will run without any modifications being required. That's platform independence. Don't confuse Java the language with Java the platform.

I know that you are refering to me Canuck. The thing is, fewt NEEDS opposition as well as ALL closed minded individuals do. Personally, I don't think fewt is TOTALLY closed minded, just really close. One thing is, ALL IT people are very set in their ways and cannot be shaken from what they are used to and like, be it Windows OR Unix flavored software. I am going to try FreeBSD as it is a more PURE form of Unix. I'm not doing this to pick it apart or out of ulterior motives, just to explore *new* software. If only Unix loyalists would look at MS software in this way.............

BTW, where is our buddy? He was AWOL all day yesterday..........

Whatever happened to fair competition? Whatever happened to not using your monopoly for illegal acts?

It's more like:

Whatever happened to the government staying out of free trade? Isn't this why we fought the Revolutionary War against England? The Sherman Anti-Trust Act/"law" is Anti-American, Anti Competitive, Anti-Capitalism and many other HORRIBLE things. It is also a REALLY good excuse for Communistic/Socialistic individuals and companies to "cry foul" when their s***ty products can't compete with Capitalistic individuals and companies.

"fair competition" is for China, NOT the US. We here in the US believe that if you want to win in business that you "Bust yer ass", NOT "Sue yer ass"...............

As long as you aren't going the GUI way, you'll be happy you chose FreeBSD and not Linux

Really? Whats with the GUI?

thanks for the followup on that fewt.

what exactly is .Net taking over? I'm kind of fuzzy on that since I don't see any real industry established on its principles that it targets. Did you mean "cover this new market"? its not exactly beating anyone out of a marketshare.

feel free to fill my ears and eyes with info.

explain how you can compair sun, novell, apple, etc, etc, etc to the current lawsuits that are happening. Please. I would love to hear your theory on this. that ma and pa 5 man web shot line was bunk.

eeeeh. mornings. what i meant was compare novell, sun, apple, netscape, etc. to a ma and pa 5 man opperation.

your ma and pa opperation wont have the budget to file a suit

regardless, its still not shockwave. *Super Grin*

Yes, I meant cover this new market.

"I saw quite a bit of debate saying that Microsoft should open this and that. As far as Office is concerned, any Office document be it excel, powerpoint, or word, can be exported as an HTML document. .NET is wholly based around open standards like XML and SOAP. Even the MSN Messenger protocol has been opened (unlike AOL). I think this shows Microsoft is going into that direction."

Part of Microsoft's widely known embrace, extend, and exterminate stratigy.

Step 1. Embrace new techonolgy: "See, we use XML and standards. Aren't we wonderful. Everyone should use us because we are nice and support open things."

Step 2. Extend: "Say hello to MSXML! It's much better and supports more then those silly standards. Aren't we wondefful. Everyone should use use because we have the most features."

Step 3: Exterminate: "Internet Explorer 7.0: With MSXML!" "WindowsXP 2.0 with MSXML!" "Microsoft OfficeXP 2.0 with MSXML!"... months later over 95% of the market uses MSXML and new versions eventually wipe out whatever of the real XML standard was left and they sucessfully destroyed it. Meanwhile MS zeliots are praising Microsoft for their cool version of XML and all the stuff their products support now....

P.S. Office saves with what you could essecially call MSHTML. And if you have a fancy Word document none of the things will get saved with it once it is exported to MSHTML. Even then there will be problems viewing it in a non-Microsoft product due too it's MSextended HTML and CSS.

Java is just another fine example of Microsoft's embrace, extend, and exterminate stratigy.

I'm not sure this really proves anything, Chris. If Java (the language) only runs on a VM adhering to Sun's specs (which make up the Java platform), you still end up porting the platform to a new OS. Java (language) only runs on one platform (the platform adhering to VM specs) therefore the language is not platform independent.

The two are tightly coupled, as a matter of fact Sun generally just calls the two 'Java' as a single entity.

The good thing is that .NET may soon become a standard. It would be difficult to simply change something as you're suggesting quite so easily.

As for MSHTML, any Word and Powerpoint docs I have published on the web work just fine with Netscape and Opera. Granted complex documents may not be so easily exported, you can easily print the document and make it a PDF. What standard is there now that lets you make such complex documents which work on all platforms except HTML itself?

My point was simply that it is not practical to include every competitor's product in Windows. And it is unfair to say those companies which have the budget to fund a large legal team can only be included in a judgement like that.

I mean to say, why would only Java have to be included with Windows? Microsoft makes many products which have competition.

Nothing really, unless you want bleeding edge software precompiled. It runs Linux applications in an "emulator err binary compatability layer" type of deal, I hear it's near native speed. FreeBSD and Linux are more similar than dissimilar. The reason some choose one over the other is some feel Linux is fragmented. (It's not really.)

Fair competition? What is this marvellous thing that you speak of? Who said competition had to be fair? You're quite welcome to step out into the real world where you might just realise that business and especially large corporations did not get to where they are nor stay where they are by being 'fair' to the opposition. Hey I know... Adobe should be forced to either stop work on Photoshop or release all of it's source code because it just isn't fair to it's competitors that their product is the best by a long shot.

Seriously, as nice as it is to go around shouting ideas of a free market, fair competition.....peace on Earth... etc. you have to realise that a lot of these people are just in it for themselves. They're not about to step up and be helpful to a competitor!

And my original comment still stands, it seems that in America if you can't get what you want you can always sue.

Yes Java (the language) only runs on a virtual machine. It's actually the byte code that gets interpreted by the virtual machine but let's not get paedentic.

"Java (language) only runs on one platform..."
Yes and no. I guess it depends on wether you define a VM to be a platform or not =) And IBM's VM is quite different to Sun's VM which is quite different to MS' VM etc etc. The VM spec is just that, a spec, the implementations of that spec are different.

And yes, Sun do call everything 'Java' because they want the platform and the language used to be Java =)

Honestly? JAVA, AND .NET services (including passport) should be left out of the O/S. Installed from Windows update, or a third party update tool would be cool though IMHO. Wait, there's a whole new market.. Updates.. Linux has it today (at cost update management), Windows should too.

I think thats fair. And I also like Linux updates via Red Carpet. Very nice software.

There are actually several posters that I'm referring to.
But I'll keep precicely whom to myself. ;D

Not *all* IT type people are set in their ways...
Let's see..
Once upon a time I used an Amiga
Then switched to a DOS-based PC
Then used Windows 3.1
Briefly used OS/2 Warp
Then was one of the first people using Win95
Since then I've used many distros of Linux, BeOS, FreeBSD and QNX.
I'm currently spending half my time in Windows, and about half in FreeBSD.

As for web browsers, constantly switching between them.
Guess I'm the complete opposite of your stereotype :)

Huh? Why are people saying this?
FreeBSD uses KDE and GNOME like everything else.

It doesn't have anything similar to LinuxConf, but that's because it doesn't really need them - it's not like it is in Linux where there are 1000 different config files scattered around the filesystem with constantly changing layouts. You've got /etc. The files are really obvious. The default files, which are read first, can be found in /etc/defaults. None of the spaghetti configs you find in some Linux distros (Mandrake and Redhat spring to mind)

What do you mean nothing? It comes with KDE 2.2.2 and GNOME 1.4!
Bleeding edge? KDE 2.2.2 is very stable. However, you can use FVWM, Afterstep, Windowmaker... whatever you want.

Precompiled? Of course it is! Even Slackware installs with precompiled binaries. Have you tried compiling KDE from scratch recently? It takes forever. If you really do want to compile it, you can go to /usr/ports, find KDE and do a make install.

The Linux emulation layer is not needed for the stuff it comes installed with. KDE and all the applications are compiled natively for FreeBSD (hence the term 'ports' - they've been ported to BSD)
The only time you need the emulation layer is for really awkward things that only have Linux binaries - I think maybe Realplayer and Staroffice, that's about it.

Chris, an OS is completely different from an application. I don't need Photoshop to view/edit/create images (most formats used are supported by tons of other applications). I can choose whatever application I want to but if I want to run xx% of todays applications, I am forced to use an OS created by a single company: MS. I even received a mail on a newslist a couple of days ago in Word-format. The author had sent it in Word cause "everybody can read word documents".

I for one, enjoy seeing the biggest 2 a******s in the computer industry, at each others throats. If they both died tommorrow, they would not be missed more than the time to change to something differant. Spies, covert operations,
this made laugh so hard, my sides hurt!

heh

Gee, I wonder which 2 you are talking about? LOL!!!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

"differant"?

Is that an ant that defers?

Also, your name calling shows your intelligence level.........

Or maybe an ant that differs?

As does yours.

Hey, he called BOTH of us names. I was defending you as well in spite of our differences. ;-)

No need to defend me, I am perfectly capable of admitting I'm the biggest a****** on the net. ;-)

Well, at least you admit it!

JK

{8OD

fewt spammed me with ASCII porn because i said he was about as l33t as my rotary phone in a speed dial benchmark.

LOL! :)

DAMN IT IT WAS ANSI PORN! (heh)

I dont do bad, considering I'm a hayseed. :}

For a hayseed, swearing Is allowed. As for brains, I know 1 + 1=3 :)

Hey, nothin personal :)

mmmmmmm i use lynx to browse it all. mmmmmmm... only problem is i cant tell what her hand is .... ooooooooo! mmmmmmmmm...

You unix guys crack me up. First you say Microsoft is evil personified and now you praise AOL (who by the way has DOMINATED internet service since it became popular) Could someone POSSIBLY make up their mindless here? I only hope that some day you live to regret, TO THE CORE OF YOUR SOULS, the folly in praising AOL for using this inferior product. Oh, yeah! It comes with that inferior OS you guys use.......

Wanna REAL OS? Use CALDERA SYSTEMS INC. UNIXWARE 7

Oh, thats right. You cheap SOB's think all software should be free when it costs money to make it.

Nice troll. I don't know what on earth your're ranting on about, but you certainly manage it loudly...

Since when were AOL responsible for Mozilla anyway?
All they did was buy it, fill it with their advertising crap, and call it Netscape. Nobody is praising them for that.

Though, as I said in the message just below this, it's quite handy for us that Gecko is about to become popular. That is NOT praising AOL though, it's just pointing out one of the advantageous side-effects of what they're doing.

BTW: You're confusing Free as in Beer with Free as in Speech. You're quite welcome to pay someone to write some GPL software, you know... but like most people, you assume that unless it's a legal requirement, there's no point in paying...
FYI I use Windows, Linux and BSD, and see the advantages of *all* the licencing systems. Stop flame baiting for a minute, and you may too.

Like I said, "Wanna REAL OS? Use CALDERA SYSTEMS INC. UNIXWARE 7"

And I'll add, Wanna REAL Browser? Use Microsoft Internet Explorer.

Too bad that the only Unix OS that supports IE is Solaris on a Sparc or Ultra Sparc.........

And BTW, TIME is money unless u happen to be a pimply faced 16yr. old Unix geek with no girlfriend...........

I'm sorry, IE is available for Solaris AND HP-UX. My bad......

Like you right? No thx. I make a very good living with REAL O/S's, not your toy junk.

Unixware is dead, it has been for a long time now. REAL O/S? Please, HP/UX AIX Solaris OS/390 Tru64 Linux390 Linux BSD.. These are REAL OS's, they are what runs the world not your little wanna be OS. No IE for Linux? Not *MY* problem, I'm not the one limiting it's market. I have a choice of 5 other browsers, if they don't want to compete by providing their product on my O/S I won't lose any sleep. FYI, for those that must have IE on Linux, IE 4.0 and 5.01 work great in WINE. I haven't tested anything newer as it wasn't necessary. Do a minimal Win95 install on a small partition, and install all of your old apps. Mount it somewhere, and point the wine config at it. It's that simple. (It's possible to do it without windows, but it's much more difficult, and well beyond the scope of this comment.) Compdoc, with your view of the world you'll be happy to know that you will always remain the little guy. ;-)

Sorry, I'm 30 something AND I make a VERY good living with my "toy junk". $60.00 + Per Hr. for MUCH less work than working with Unix I can guarantee. Betcha that makes ya steamed doesn't it?

LOL! :)

AND, if I CHOOSE to, I can grab the train to NYC and make $150.00 Per Hr. working with my "toy junk".

Nothing like a life of ease when it comes to "work" if ya want to call it that.........

Try not to bust your keyboard beyond repair over the above 2 comments......

{:D

But thats the difference between Windows guys and Unix guys. We like it EASY, you like it DIFFICULT. But thats ok, you can have that if you choose to............

Why would I be steamed? If you are self employed, you pay half of that in taxes and other "government funds". You have to also pay for what three different forms of insurance, and it just doesn't stop there. All said and done even at $60.00 an hour I made more than you did last year. ;-)

WOW, sucks to be me.. I turned down a contract offer for a single unix admin 6 mos assignment in NYC at $140K.

BUT, my money was E-A-S-Y......

AND, PC's aren't my ONLY Business :)

I am also the owner of an E-commerce web site that does equally as well if not better than my PC business. I could actually close my PC business and sit on the couch ALL day long watching TV and playing Quake if I chose to but I like to work.......somewhat :D

WOW, you call things like patching daily, nimda, code red, melissa, blue screens, service packs gone bad, etc easy? Oh yeah, if it's broke reboot it. I get it. I didn't realize that it was difficult to manage systems that aren't windows, I always thought it was easier. I can tell you one thing, I don't have to babysit my linux and unix machines like I do my 2000 servers. Unix machines come with this thing called the commandline, every tool is scriptable. Everything can be made to manage itself. Tell me, can your system detect and kill zombie or rogue processes without user intervention? How about a process that decides that it wants to eat 5GB of ram? Wait, your toys can't even address 5GB of ram. (XP64? Please, there are NO APPS.) LOL Please, continue on your rant, so I can make laugh a bit more. :-P

You think mine isn't? It's so tough that I can manage to find time to argue with you all day long. ;-)

Heck, I gave my 3rd. "job" up recently as the Jerky Boys would say, "Over differences with my f**kin boss" but he still sends HIGH paying clients my way. Got something comin up in a few weeks that pays $450.00 per hr. for the easiest work I'll possibly ever do in my entire life. It makes me sick to even think how easy it's gonna be :D

Keep up the hard work there fewt, it's doing you a world of good and making you such a nice, agreeable person filled with the utmost kindness toward your fellow man.......

Well, if all I can do is to bring laughter into someones life here, I have accomplished my good deed for the day :)

I don't get what the deal is with AOL. Never seen the damn thing, never had to use it or install it and neither has any of my friends and colleagues. Point is, you don't need AOL as an ISP to get on the internet but you practically need MS Windows if you want to do any (desktop) computing. I work for a Unix company. It's always nice to see a customer send me Excel-sheets, Word-documents or PowerPoint presentations and me having to send them a nice mail asking to put it in an open format as we cannot read MS's closed, proprietary formats.
AOL is far from the monopoly as an ISP as MS is a monopoly for the desktop OS. Whenever something bad about MS is said, you guys start firing back with AOL. Is AOL a saint? Sure they are not, I hate the fact that there still is no standard IM protocol and AOL has a big part in that.
I am glad AOL finally is going to use the Gecko engine in their next release. Will I use it? I never have, had to and probably never will.
I'm hoping that using a rendering engine which goal is to be 100% W3C compliant will make the web more accessible for non-Windows OS'ses as more and more web-developpers will have to take notice of non-IE browsers. This might just loosen MS's grip on the web-browsing market.

Hey, no problem.

Glad to help : )

Nice reply. I'm just saying fair is fair when it comes to monopolies. It seems alot of the time that Unix guys start cheering for companies that will just fill MS's shoes when it comes to being an illegal monopoly. We don't need to fill a bad void with something else that is bad but rather with something that is good.

Sun isn't that company and neither is AOL just because they start saying that they will use Red Hat. They are baiting MUCH worse than I do whilst I troll. :)

True, very true :D

My point is: build on open standards. Drop Office-formats or submit them as open standards. Quit using all those proprietary formats, protocols etc... and use open ones. It will allow everyone to communicate with each other.
Where would the internet be without TCP/IP, e-mail be without SMTP...
Microsoft can afford to use their own, closed, proprietary formats and protocols because they are a monopoly and by using those, they basicly prevent others from providing a replacement.

BUT, I will learn more unix/linux beyond my basic knowledge of it's inner workings to prepare for the possibility of it replacing MS, although I don't see that happening anytime soon. I just don't have the time or desire at this time. Maybe later........Yawn........

Open may be good for certain things such as standards BUT when it comes to security, it's not. Any malicious programmer may sift through source and write exploits at will if it's open. If the source is closed, the inner workings are hidden from "black hats" There is no consideration of this for the most part.

I like to use some apps with my OS, which I think is why I spend most time in Windows :)

But sorry for blowing up on you.. someone here needs to remind me not to post late at night...

That's a crock, Windows is closed yet there are 1000x more exploits for it than every OSS OS combined.

Additionally, I call FreeBSD the "real OS" but we're talking about opinions here... there's no 'right' or 'wrong' OS. Heh, BeOS (or WasOS, past tense) was a "real OS" to me before it died :(

Hey, I resent that! I'm 19, not 16 ;)

Yes, that is true......But why?

Because unix based programmers from the early 1970's HATE MS and Windows SO much that they spend their "free time" decompiling Windows source and writing exploits.

Windows guys wouldn't destroy their OWN OS now would they....

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Scott McSnively has a "secret army" of black hats on the take to do exactly that..........

IF Unix/Linux ever replaces Windows, I suspect you will see tons of ex-Windows programmers doing EXACTLY the same thing in revenge for having their OS attacked. So, I would educate the people responsible for doing these malicious things that some day it may come back to bite them........

If that happens, then Windows will be the "underground" OS......

I use both Windows and Unix, and can tell you that the difficulty is a myth. When you first start out on Windows, it's difficult (ask any person new to PCs). On top of that, they change the layout every few versions (ask anyone who eventually got used to Win98, then got it upgraded to WinXP by 'a friend who knows about computers')

Similarly, once you're used to Windows, Unix systems seem difficult at first. I was tearing my hair out for about a year when the Linux fad started. But once you're used to those, they're so easy to use. Especially easy to fix most things once you know the way around... take boot problems for instance - use a boot disk, mount the partition, chroot, do whatever, reboot. In Windows, you can't get in to fix it, so you reinstall.

Okay, Linux can be a pain due to the lack of agreement in simple things like directory structure, dependencies and installer formats... it was lucky it caught on... but FreeBSD is the answer to all that. It really is easy. Say you want to change a system setting, like disabling APM or something (random example)... No checkbox-hunting or registry digging (Windows) or crawling through the directories working out where they put the system settings on *this* distro (Linux) - just look in /etc/defaults/rc.conf for reference, and edit /etc/rc.conf. Dead easy!

Want to install some software? /stand/sysinstall, point it to FTP, browse at your heart's content. Dependencies are downloaded and installed automatically.

Anyway, isn't Unixware a Unix, going by the clue in the title? Much like OS/2, I've never given this OS a second thought... but doesn't this mean you're criticising yourself?

No appology needed, I took no offence.

I never used BeOS, just Mandrake and RedHat. I think the next time I try a unix based OS that it will be "pure" unix, even if I have to pay for it.

Open Unix 8 from Caldera might be a good one to try.

That would be an ironic repeat of history now wouldn't it?

;-)

"Because unix based programmers from the early 1970's HATE MS and Windows SO much that they spend their "free time" decompiling Windows source and writing exploits. "

OMG, don't tell me you actually believe that. If you do, get help now.

It'll never happen.

Well, there's not much time left before it surpasses Windows on servers. Unless you are a 100% desktop centric individual, you'll be left behind in a year or two if you don't learn something else.

You don't actually think that Windows users are plotting/facilitating to undermine/destroy their OWN OS do you?

If so, YOU are the one who needs to "get help now"

And if it's NOT Windows users, then who may I ask is it?

I wouldn't be TOO sure of that...........

TELL ME!? Who writes the exploits/viruses that makes Windows look so bad?

Windows people write Windows exploits and virii. This is just how it is. Do you think Unix people wrote dos viruses before windows was an option? NO. Tell me how a Unix person writes a Windows virus on a Unix computer, please.

Oh, so NO unix/linux users have Windows boxes AT ALL? They wouldn't just own one so they could pick it apart and make it look bad?

"Windows people write Windows exploits and virii. This is just how it is." has to be the lamest attempt to cover up the truth that I've ever seen!

"Do you think Unix people wrote dos viruses before windows was an option?" Umm, yeah. So you say that unix users were forbidden to own a DOS box? Cyber terrorists study their target would be the proper way to look at it.

"Tell me how a Unix person writes a Windows virus on a Unix computer, please." OMG, more cover up's. Umm, they get a Windows box and write it in Windows. You seem to be saying that Unix guys don't have a clue about how Windows works but on the other hand espouse how smart they are....

Make up your mindless already!

And, ONCE AGAIN........

You don't actually think that Windows users are plotting/facilitating to undermine/destroy their OWN OS do you?!

EAGERLY awaiting your re-fewt on this one...........

"You don't actually think that Windows users are plotting/facilitating to undermine/destroy their OWN OS do you?! "

Yes, I do. Most of the people that have busted have been WINDOWS software developers, or KIDS.

WELL...............

You don't actually think that Windows users are plotting/facilitating to undermine/destroy their OWN OS do you?!

I DON'T BELIEVE IT FOR ONE SECOND AND ANY WINDOWS USER THAT DOES IS A COMPLETE FOOL-MORON-IDIOT!!!!!!!

Windows users would NOT destroy their OWN OS either in theory or practice!

STOP TRYING IN VAIN TO MAKE US BELIEVE THIS

Every non-moron already knows it. I'm not trying anything in vain. Feel free to prove me wrong.

When I sent my post I was thinking of adding a 2nd post cause I was pretty sure you'd mis-understand. There is a difference between open standards/formats (the thing I've been talking about) and open source. Why do people always mix those 2.
Open standards means you have a "white paper" describing how something should work etc... It is up to each developer to built that "thing" that does what the white paper describes. There is NO CODE in an open standard, just guidelines. That is what enables competition. Different implementations, all doing the same thing, able to interoperate and you have the CHOICE to use whatever application you think is the best. No where is my choice with closed formats/protocols?
Open Source means you can indeed see the code. Which is safer, more secure (Open or Closed source), I'm not going to discuss, but a large portion of the security community thinks that Microsofts "security by obscurity" is a bad thing. You draw your conclusions.
BTW, your comment on Unix-guys desperatly trying to destroy Windows is a desperate attempt to make them look bad cause you know it's not true. Unix guys don't program in Windows. And I'm pretty sure Scott McNealy (that's his name, grow up) or Sun doesn't have a team writing exploits. It would be a waste of resources and time and there are plenty of other people eager and willing to do that. Sorry for you you got brainwashed by the Microsoft marketing department (10e1000 versions of windows because of Sun, what a joke).

So you don't believe in corporate spies? An easy to understand for YOU "anal"ogy would be Spacely Sprockets vs Cogswell Cogs from the Jetsons................

Gimme a freakin break................

See above "Astro" ^

"Every non-moron already knows it."

Nice re-use of a comment from a WINDOWS user in this article. See, unix guys CAN learn new tricks from Windows users...................

I use Windows XP, Solaris, AIX, Linux, OS/390 and VMS... So what am I? Am I a Windows-user, Unix-user, Main-framer???
I'm not a programmer but I'm pretty sure a lot of guys are in the MS programming market cause that's where they can get some money (writing Visual Basic etc...). Do you really think those guys all LOVE Windows and wouldn't do anything to hurt their BELOVED OS?
If you believe that, you'll probably believe anything hence my previous remark: sorry you got brainwashed by the MS marketing department.

"BTW, your comment on Unix-guys desperatly trying to destroy Windows is a desperate attempt to make them look bad cause you know it's not true."

Like I've said...........

Windows users would NOT destroy their OWN OS either in theory or practice!

And, I also said........

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Scott McSnively has a "secret army" of black hats on the take to do exactly that..........

Of course he wouldn't have a paper trail or any other trail that could be found readily and with that, of course they would be paid in cash, not a Sun Microsystems company check.

I'm NOT "brainwashed by the MS marketing department" but I ALSO refuse to believe that Windows is being destroyed by it's own users.

It's more like:

Unix "Moles"

OR

Unix Corporate Spies

OR do such people not exist? Not even one?

There is PLENTY of reading out there concerning corporate spies...........they DO exist...........and not just in movies...........

They would, they could, and they do.

You don't make $60 an hour.

There's no denying that unix people write windows viruses too, however the majority of them are written by Windows users, or kids.

You're right, I said $60.00 + Per Hr. I average much more than that :D

Then you are your only customer. ;-)

"There's no denying that unix people write windows viruses too"

Thank you for FINALLY admitting this.

"however the majority of them are written by Windows users"

This I DON'T believe unless you are speaking of the Unix/Linux user that owns a Windows box. They don't count as "true" Windows users as they have ulterior motives....

", or kids."

KIDS? Sorry, "kids" can't write viruses unless you are talking about one of the readily available, do-it-yourself "Virus Making Kits" available from immature/amature - Warez/Haxor - llama sites. With those, most Anit-Virus software EASILY picks up anything created by them along with llama tools like BO, BO2K, etc.

I guess I need to choose my words VERY carefully with you guys as you tend to run with a meaning other than what was intended..............

I am talking about "Windows Users" that ONLY use Windows in it's various flavors. There are MANY

Would THEY write viruses OR exploits that would destroy THEIR OWN OS or cause it to be scorned by the IT industry?

Don't think so.

If I was my only customer, I would run out of cabbage real quick as I work alot of hours.

>"however the majority of them are written by Windows
> users"
>
>This I DON'T believe unless you are speaking of the
>Unix/Linux user that owns a Windows box. They don't count
>as "true" Windows users as they have ulterior motives....
>", or kids."
>
>KIDS? Sorry, "kids" can't write viruses unless you are
>talking about one of the readily available, do-it-
>yourself "Virus Making Kits" available from
>immature/amature - Warez/Haxor - llama sites. With those,
>most Anit-Virus software EASILY picks up anything created
>by them along with llama tools like BO, BO2K, etc.
>

Yes, you would be surprised what a kid could accomplish. How arrogent of you to think otherwise. Developing software on the Windows platform is easy, all it takes is a bit of VB or C, and an attitude. Ya know, it's sad that you can't see past your nose. ;-) Look in the news reports, almost all of the worms last year were created by Windows using KIDS.

Yes, "They would, they could, and they do." have a "secret army" of black hats on the take to destroy Windows and it's reputation.

And IF Unix/Linux based systems become "mainstream" as Windows now IS, you can expect the same treatment right back at cha........

"Look in the news reports, almost all of the worms last year were created by Windows using KIDS."

Yeah, I know of such a kid in MY area who is a snively "little brat" with no girlfriend. He has a Windows box but his PRIMARY OS is Linux and thinks he knows EVERYTHING there is to know about computers and has a misguided dislike for MS products. My daughter told me how popular he is with the girls in her school...........

He is destined to become another Kevin Mitnick is all I can say..........

Only by people like you. I'd like to hear more about your "black hat" theory. Tell me, which crevice do you get this information from?

No you don't, look at the patterns. You are here more than I am, and I'm paid to sit at *MY* PC.

Your problem, not mine. How do you know so much about this kid huh? You or your daughter seems to know an aweful lot about him for someone that isn't very popular. She's probably just telling you that to throw the scent off. Being the most disliked kid in school, perhaps she's playing on your feelings in order for you to overlook the fact that she's so close to him that she even knows what O/S's are on his computers in his bedroom. heh

"How do you know so much about this kid huh?"

He has "bugged" every PC business and ISP in my area for years for a job but cant seem to land a steady one for his lack of maturity.

"You or your daughter seems to know an aweful lot about him for someone that isn't very popular. She's probably just telling you that to throw the scent off. Being the most disliked kid in school, perhaps she's playing on your feelings in order for you to overlook the fact that she's so close to him that she even knows what O/S's are on his computers in his bedroom. heh"

I won't reply to your personal attack on either me or my daughter other than when I mentioned his name to her, she said, "Oh, you mean that kid? He's a dork"..............

And "aweful" is spelled AWFUL

http://www.somethingawful.com/

Oh yeah, she also said, "None of the girls in my school like him."

BTW, I know EVERY move she makes and would NEVER in this lifetime let her date someone like that EVEN if she wanted to.

Yes, they would. Do you think 1% of the population is enough to populate MCafee's virus database? mmmm no.

Ok, if you say so. There was no personal attack there, though I'm pleased that you read it as such. :-P

So, your daughter is so popular that she knows every girl in school? She must be nothing like you.

Have you heard the expression 'script kiddies' what you think they are ? some 70 year old dude writing scripts ? I just about all of the DOS attack's come from little script kiddies.

you ever think free software might just be better ? look at how long it takes the Linux/UNIX group to fix securtiy problems. it toke the linux/unix group to fix the SNMP problem within a couple days, it toke microsoft a full week to patch it.

You don't under stand security do you ? that statement pretty much states windows is more secure then linux/unix. Then why is it that on windows any user has read/write access ? that way any virus has sole ownership of the system, and can do whatever it feels like. with linux/unix, the virus has to be ran as root, how many people are that dumb to run a unknown script as root ?

dude, u dumb ass. What do you mean, "you think software should be free when it costs money to make". Well, if the money that u pay to get the software to make the software was free, then the software doesnt cost money to make. Sometimes thinking helps.

Toke? Yeah, thats it, have another.

Isn't time money? Or didn't your paper route start this season yet?

Your name calling shows your intelligence level

It's just that, a theory. But I don't think it's too far off.......

The point was.........

"Windows guys wouldn't destroy their OWN OS"

It wasn't about Windows being less secure than other OS's

But.........while we're at it. Are you saying if all patches, a good anti-virus scanner and firewall are in place AND permissions are set correctly, that it is totally impossible to secure Windows? Just wondering.......

And I'm paid to sit at mine as well.....

Life is good isn't it ;-)

Yep, keep taking the blame away from where I and many others know it points to............

We STILL know............

Yeah, and WHO wrote the "do-it-yourself" tools that the little script kiddies can download, type in an IP and hit Send with?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Whatever, I shant stoop to thine level in any event......

Actually, yeah she knows all the girls that our "geek in question" must fantasize about on a daily basis.

News Flash: He actually has 6 girlfriends, Rosy Palm and her 5 sisters.............

LOL! :)

Or do you mean by free money that you steal that as well as your software?

OR do you mean that you suckle the government's tit with free grants?

WOW, did you just call that guy a thief?

Unix/Linux loyalists love to see MS embarrassed by bugs, etc. You don't think they try to help it along once in a while if not more?

Haven't you been hitten it hard enough already?

So you really do believe that stuff? OMG! Get help..

It is totally impossable to secure windows, PERIOD. It is no different than any other O/S, exception being that it takes 1000x more software and effort to lock it down.

Keep collecting that check every week, eventually they will stop forcing us to pay into your fund. ;-)

Or a government subsidized freeloader, take your pick. He didn't say so I asked........

"We still know......."

Yeah, so do we. I think you've single handedly put everyone on this site into ROTFL mode listening to that FUD you've been spewing, Thx. We all knew you were nutts already, you didn't need to advertise it. ;-)

Like I said a few weeks ago.........

No No No No, I don't smoke it no mo.......

{;-P

Someone that knew windows well enough to write a toolkit. Doubt it was a unix guy, but feel free to prove me wrong, I'll be right here waiting.

Too late.

WOW, picking on a child. You must feel like a REAL MAN now. LOL Get a life guy, the more you talk the more a loser you make yourself out to be. ;-)

OpenUnix 8 will be crap just like all of the other releases were.

So, NO OS is totally secure if I'm getting this right?

If you've ever been on Solaris or HP/UX, and installed IE you'd understand why no one uses it. It's the sorriest excuse for a browser I've ever seen. Netscape *3* was better.

heh

Sure we love it, the best part is the fact that we don't have to help!

Absolutely.

Now that was uncalled for. I may have an easy work life, but I am no freeloader. All I have is earned by my minimal, blood, sweat and tears. I expect no free rides although I like an easy one.

So then why is Windows so bad in your opinion? If no OS is totally secure, it shouldn't matter which one you use if you like it and know how to secure it to the best of your ability.

"Nuts" is a point of view that most take against opposing sides. There are many Windows guys that look at Linux/Unix fanatics as "Nuts" as well, although they may be perfectly sane.

And if this "battle", which I take as good clean fun and a way to blow off steam for the most part makes people laugh, then so be it. Laughter is good for the soul.......

Windows is bad because it's maintained by a single corporation known to break the law on a whim, it is full of holes (I said no O/S is totaly secure, but come on..), it is bundled with applications that can't be removed, uses only closed proprietary interfaces, and is very unstable. (Yes, XP seems to address that somewhat, however it's my understanding that a video driver can still bring it down, that should NEVER happen.) There are many other reasons, but that's enough.

I should have said :-P heh

Laughter is good, it's something I tend to do whenever I come here. :-P

I don't think XP is full of holes. At least no where as near previous versions of Windows. I like Windows XP and it installs EVERY driver for EVERY piece of harware in my system before first boot. If you use the stock video driver that comes in the Driver Information Database that has been CERTIFIED to be stable with Windows XP, you won't get a crash. Then again, if you install the latest Detonators leaked on http://www.reactorcritical.com/ and ignore every warning the OS presents that the driver isn't "Digitally Signed", you really can't expect it to be stable can you?

:-P

I wouldn't expect video to be stable, but I would expect the system to continue to function. (behind the scenes)

The solution would be to leave the leaked Detonators or any other uncertified driver alone and let Windows Update determine what the OS needs. XP never crashed on me until I kept forcing leaked drivers on it but that was my fault, not Microsoft's. I don't mind the occasional crash if my games run better but if you are talking about a production system for a business, there is no reason to mess with drivers that could cause problems. XP with stock drivers just doesn't crash.

I think the guy that wrote the first DDOS tool was from Germany. Don't know what his OS of choice was...........BUT it could have been unix/linux. Mind you I said "could".........

He gets what he deserves for being a "know-it-all" teenage brat with a closed mind.

OK, what version of PURE unix would you recommend that doesn't require proprietary hardware?

I better get crackin the books soon then eh?

Pick a BSD. (BSD is REAL UNIX -7 files ;-) Linux is JUST as good as any other UNIX (heh) If you want another REAL UNIX, get Solaris for x86, I believe it's a free download.

I'm downloading FreeBSD 4.5 right now. Sorry, I've tried Slowaris and I just can't bring myself to use it with the Sun lawsuit and all. Scotty makes me sick.

Besides, even MS likes FreeBSD :)

http://www.microsoft.com.../jun01/06-27corelpr.asp

XP is a *huge* improvement. Or rather, 2000 was, and XP brings it to the home desktop, completing it.

As for the display drivers though... yes it can take down the system (blue screen). I have the infamous "Infinite loop BSOD" syndrome that is probably being referred to here, and it's *annoying*. I can practically eliminate it by stepping down to 2X AGP, but shouldn't really have to. I am running a major cheapo make and model of Geforce2 (Innovision's worst), which is probably a good reason for it, though cheapo POS cards should really be accounted for in the drivers.

Or more importantly, a small infinite loop in a display driver shouldn't bring down the OS.

But I'm not Windows bashing - I use it extensively. It is an annoying flaw though.

Missed the main point: I (and many others) get this infinite loop BSOD with certified drivers - both the built-in ones and the 21.83s

Could be bad hardware OR the one I really hate, a USB IRQ conflict with the Video IRQ. Have you checked the MS Knowledge Base?

I agree, hopefully they will fix it by SP1. I get video crashes once or twice a week, more if I play games. BUT, now this is for fewt :), it only started for me when I forced the latest Dets' from Reactor Critical on XP. My fault, not XP's. I never heard of the infinate loop bug you are getting. Is it documented anywhere? After I enabled 4X AGP, my system crashed every hour or so for a day but only while I was playing Q3 in SMP mode or Wolf in SMP mode. After everything "burned in", things quieted down to 1 or 2 times a week where it has stayed.

Ahhh yes, the incredibly secure and brilliant unix security scheme.....You're either god (root) or you're not! Not the greatest security model either I'm afraid.

Actually, many Windows users probably do write exploits.

Some to try and point out security holes in the OS they're using - what better way to get the point across, than to exploit it and say 'look, big hole, fix it'. As an example, some companies actually hire known crackers to try and take down their system.

Or you get those who just write viruses and exploits for jollies... they don't care about much at all, so they're not going to care about the OS they use either are they? After all, they themselves are safe - if they can write a virus or exploit, they can most likely protect themselves from it as well...

Believe me, I've tried everything. Changing drivers and IRQs, installing things the correct order, trying various VIA chipset drivers (both automatically and manually installed), Windows Updates, virus scans, removing ACPI mode, running the system without any other unnecessary cards, reinstalling from a brand new hard disk, removing sticks of RAM, upgrading the power supply to a powerful Enermax model, changing the I/O voltage, every concievable BIOS setting (especially drive strength), rearranging cards, keeping the system extra cool... You name it, I've tried it :)

I'm 99.999% sure now that it's either a faulty card or faulty drivers. Whatever the fault is however, it's something that only Windows notices, and I'm not the only one who claims to have tried everything concievable.

No OS can possibly be "totally secure".

One could argue that Windows has more viruses, holes etc and so takes more effort to make 'reasonably secure'. On the other hand, *nix can be *very* tough to secure as well, at least depending on the distro, since there tends to be so many services running... and generally there are no cleverly wrapped firewall packages - you compile the features into the kernel, generate the scripts etc yourself. Which I can assure you is no fun :) There are still tufts of hair on the floor from trying to set up a secure Linux NAT gateway in this house. Distros like fli4l are nice for that though. Or Smoothwall, if the MD wasn't a complete git.

It's easy to gather everything under one name "Windows users", "Unix users"... The reality is not like that.
Don't blame MS's lack of "security vision" in designing their products on Unix.
Whenever a Unix hole is found and an exploit is created, do you also conclude that it must be a Windows user 'cause no Unix user would ever do that.
Think about what you are saying; do you really believe that someone who uses an OS has a god-like adoration for that OS and won't do anything to hurt it? You must be a real idealist if you have that much faith in people. I'm afraid you're going to get hurt once you get in the real world.

www.viaarena.com - there's an article there somewhere about it. Also on the message boards there, people are on about it all the time...

I have a feeling it's simply Windows's most common way of saying "something went wrong with the driver" rather than a specific loop problem. For most people it probably *is* something simple like an IRQ conflict or whatever... and for those of us who've tried everything under the sun - maybe we're the unlucky ones who got a faulty card. Shame that only WinXP or sometimes 2000 tends to pick up on the fault though - it might be one of these "borderline" faults, and XP just pushes the performance far enough to make it unstable.

Nicely done. If you figure out how to get KDM running properly on FreeBSD, post up :( I'm tearing hair out with it on 4.4 (actually I gave up and returned to the text login). Mainly due to the fact that they forgot to put any config files in the package - doh! It might be fixed with release 4.5 anyways.

If you want to, you can make the Unix security model as complex and difficult to use as the Windows one (just use ACL's). What's "Administrator" in Windows?
Ever heared of Trusted Solaris. It has a very secure system and root is not god.

BTW, how is "pure UNIX" defined? I take it Linux isn't a pure Unix?
(I'm not keen on Linux anyway, it's too... I think the word is 'fragmented'. Have I just answered my own question?)

Wow! :)

Did you try disabling USB in the BIOS? I know this would be out of the question if you have any USB devices but this works if you don't.

No, I'm just going by forums like this one and slashdot.org and the blatant hatred that is displayed by *many*, not all, of the posters. It would stand to reason if you hate something THAT much, you just *might* do something to harm it if you have the knowledge. Thats it, nothing more, nothing less. I'm sure *some* Windows ONLY users do write exploits/viruses for Windows as I'm sure *some* Unix ONLY users do the same for their OS, but Windows has more enemies than Unix just for the sheer popularity of the OS.

Compdoc, some "Windows-users" write unix-exploits, some "Unix-users" write windows-exploits, both groups also write exploits for their own brand of OS. But going by forums to decide how many of each of your defined groups write exploits for the "other sides OS" is not a good indicator.

After 9/11 America's first reaction was that all Islam people hated Americans while in fact the Islam is a very tollerant religion. Americans have attacked/terrorized their own nation, and so have other countries.

Don't make assumptions based on a total bias against a community.

You're right Ender. But it's very easy to get "on the defensive" when there are so many fanatics out there with closed minds. I don't think you are that way but many in the *nix* community tend to be that way. More so than Microsoft users. I think the MS users just tend to react in a bad way sometimes when all they hear is MS this and MS that is crap, evil, etc. I will be trying FreeBSD in the next few days as I really DO have an open mind and am willing to learn.

Hmm...no, that's the only thing I didn't try... I have a lot of USB stuff (the mouse for starters), so even if that did fix it, it wouldn't really be useful :) But I guess it's worth at least trying it out of curiosity. Nearest I've done so far is making sure the USB isn't on the same IRQ as the Geforce.

(Incidentally I used to have a Geforce256 in the same system, which worked fine)

unix isnt linux. unix is an operating system that preceeded linux. there are flavors of unix out there that include but are not limited to HP Unix, SCO Unix, I think Irix is also a Unix. Unix to my understanding is very much not free. In fact I think it's one of those mainframe OS's that you'll never want or need to pay for. I believe Solaris is also a unix. Linux, like minux(sp) or BSD is mearly a take off of Unix bundled with a new philosophy.

Deryk, you posted "After all, they themselves are safe - if they can write a virus or exploit, they can most likely protect themselves from it as well"

Don't you know the biggest defense of virus writers is "I didn't know it would do that!"? LOL!

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

All of the BSDs are forks of AT&T UNIX -7 files. FreeBSD I believe is the direct decendent of AT&T UNIX. HP/UX, SUNOS, IRIX, MAC OS/10 are I believe forks of a much earlier UNIX. (I'd have to go back to my book to be sure.) Linux is a new UNIX, as it is not based on the same source tree. What's interesting is that There are only really a handful of files that make up "UNIX". The rest of the files on the filesystem are the *very same files* that you will find on any Linux machine. (grep/sed/awk/bash/sh/etc). :-)

I like open source etc. Therefore I like Gecko/Mozilla (despite whatever flaws they have) and yes... want to use them in place of IE. And no, it's got nothing to do with feeling l33t :p

Problem earlier:
A site doesn't conform to standards well, and therefore doesn't display properly in Mozilla. I tell the webmaster this. He says "So what? 99% of people are using IE anyway. You're in a minority sonny... go crank up IE"

How it will hopefully be soon:
Same site, same problem. Except now, hundreds of AOL users say "j0 leet webmaster guy, this thing is broke on AOL" and the masses of confused emails fill up his inbox. Probably in HTML as well. It drives him insane so he fixes the site. Not only does that make the AOL people happy, but also Gecko/Mozilla users like myself have their problems solved as a side-effect. Even more interesting, a great deal more sites would display *properly* while running Linux, BSD, BeOS or whatever. Whoa!

Unless I'm much mistaken, Gecko is merely the rendering engine that Mozilla/Netscape uses - and rather a good one at that :)

Mozilla/Netscape is just the interface.

Watch the engine in action with a decent interface such as a *recent* build of Galeon, and it's transformed.
Speaking of which, is there a Windows build of Galeon or an alternative other than AOL?

The Mozilla interface is coming along quite well, but the progress is so slow it's painful. After submitting a couple of bug reports, I can see why - they spend so long (as in weeks, maybe months) discussing the bug and debating whether its worth fixing, that hardly anything gets done!

Even with p3p (cookie privacy levels) they've been so busy umming and ahhing that it's slated for 1.2 now. Galeon however, progresses so fast in comparison it's incredible. They've already overtaken Mozilla IMO. If it was incomplete and buggy on your system a little while ago, try it now... it changes all the time.

Do you think more people would use AOL if it was free? I actually think keywords are nice and the customized boxes built into aol yet still web based are neat to. I would POSSIBLY use AOL if it was free. I have MSN Explorer, I don't use it, but its still nice :)

Just an idea, if they don't do something soon, they are gonna go down, they are gonna expand to broadband, but hell if they touch my broad band (Road Runner) and MAKE me use their client, they are once again going to lose customers. Until they learn its the client we don't like, not the service, they will continue to lose money.

AOL's free for your first 1000 hours per credit card. Woop.

for those of you who dont understand how many hours 1000 hours is, take 31 days and multiply it times 24 hours. thats 744 hours. If you never logged off, you'd be able to surf the web for 1.5 months solidly.

i seriously doubt you'll paste yourself in front of a monitor dedicatedly for 24 hours a day for over a month.

This is some of the best news I've ever heard!

Maybe now AOL will do their own tech support rather than send all thier problems to Microsoft. Sorry AOL users - this page cannot be displayed will soon become an AOL tech support issue! :)

Do yourselves a favor and get that "virus" off your computer!

Roll-a-Jay
Feel that rocky mountain high!!

I don't use AOL, i don't like AOL, but it has a special part in britain, since it's probably the only 56k ISP with no cut-offs i know of and seen. From what i can gather, from my friends that have AOL, and from using AOL 3.0 in my early days, the AOL browser has always been of poor coding. I can't believe it even uses the IE engine, they have made a complete mess of it, the pages load 50x slower then IE can load them, and sometimes they don't even load at all. So i can only see goodness in the move to the Gecko engine, it is a great piece of coding, and works pretty well, quite slow compared to IE on my machine, and i'm still using IE, nothing has come cloe to beating it on my pc. Finally! an AOL release that could be worth something and worth using! ;)

Let's just hope, they don't screw it up.

Gimie

So it frankly doesn't matter what AOL or anyone else suggests. The type of novice user who is still using Mozilla isn't making their browser selection on any rational basis.

Kaptain Katastrophe
kksheppard@ucsd.edu

s/IE/Mozilla/i moron

Huh? I use Linux. One of the reasons for my decision not to use 'IE' is that it isn't available for my platform, because making it for anyhting besides windows would harm MS's ability to turn the internet into their private platform. But you're right, Mozilla sucks. I'd rather use Galeon or Opera.

Gotta love that subject header :) LOL!!

But it's soooooooooooooo TRUE!

I think Gecko is a briliant engine, the only thing Mozilla developers made wrong (this is why Mozilla/Netscape is slow) is UI based on XUL. Look at how fast KMeleon and it is still uses Gecko engine. KMeleon sucks without since it is a bare bones browser with no options or controls, but imagine something like Netcaptor or what is better MyIE using the Gecko engine. I wish I get such thing here.
And I really like how Gecko renders pages designed by the rules - very fast and accurate: you always know what to expect. So one wish is that if AOL wants to make a good impression on the users is stop using s***ty XUL interface and write something is MFC instead.

Gecko engine is a good browser. I started using Mozilla when they just released 0.5 At that time Mozilla was slow and bugger. however the latest 2 builts 0.9.8 & 0.9.9 make me totally give up IE & Netscape 4.X

IE seems fast, but just fast in Windows 'cause it is preloaded... I have a nice apple too -- IE mac version is kindly slow and junk (because without preloading), can't detect forign language (sometimes happens in windows version too) Of course if you just read English, IE is fine.

Render time Gecko kills IE off, absolutely.
Most important -- M$ is a devil; I am a christian.

but honestly I never sign up AOL... and netscape 6 is no good.
Why AOL doesn't update the N6? It is still in 0.9.4.... (right?)

So, please explain to me WHY this bug is STILL in Mozilla? Its been around since .9.0 or something like that. I guess noone ever double clicks on a page? Piece of crap until this is fixed. Should be NUMBER ONE priority bug, but STILL exists for at least 9 releases.

Instead of fixing a bug like this, they are adding new stuff. THIS IS INSANE!! This kind of bug should not exist in any release (yes, it exists in Netscrape 6.x - all of them).

BTW - I HAVE experienced this bug, and its kept me from switching, I am SURE other Netscrapers have too.

I don't like IE, but at LEAST M$ has the common since to release IE without problems like this...

Right, they'd rather add more serious problems like the embed tag exploit, I can see how that's much better.

The bug you are referring to is a meta-bug which tracks a group of bugs. Bug 30841 describes the behaviour you are mentioning. It was fixed 5 months ago...

You are completely correct, Fewt- Microsoft software writers purposely write all the backdoors, viruses, exploits, etc in themselves, just so everyone can gripe about how bad Microsoft is ;-)

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

HAHA! I wouldn't be surprised if one or two really were written by disgruntled employees though.

it does make one wonder! :-/

I wondered why LOL would switch to Netscape? Ever since they bought, it has gotten worse and worse. Now, it's not even a good browser, to many crashes and takes forever to load. Could this be a way to deny .NOT access to LOL's customers? Could it be a way, learned from M$, to establish Magicless Carpet as a better .NOT? Or more likely, they believe M$ will make IE crash all LOL's pop-ups? Let's start another anti-trust case...

Have you tried any of the last two Mozilla milestones? If not you can't judge how good or bad the engine is. Mozilla has really started to become a first rate browser since .9.8. Mozilla eats up the same or less resources that IE does in WindowsXP and if you use the quicklaunch feature it loads up just as fast as well.

The only reason I use IE anymore is to goto Windows Update.

The new Mozilla milestones kick the tar out of IE6. I'm often switching between the two because I'm so used to IE6. Oh, and the start-up time for Mozilla kinda gets to me sometimes when I need to access a site in a hurry. Best to use IE6 for that.

So many people are leaving AOL every day. You can tell by the desperate attitude the customer service gets when you tell them you're canceling. People leaving is balanced by the new accounts opened every day by ma and pa who just bought their new PC with AOL right there on the desktop.

That will end though if AOL switches browsers. The agreement between AOL and Microsoft as I've heard it is that Microsoft will include AOL on the desktop if AOL uses IE as its browser. Not sure if this is changed, but if AOL makes a move like this, why on earth would Microsoft include that junk with their products?

As far as gecko is concerned, it's an OK browser. But why use a second rate browser when you could use the best? Some people do it just as an alternative to Microsoft, and thats fine. But in doing so they let things slide here and there which they would never do if it was from Microsoft. Then tout it as the best. I can tell you that if gecko was the only browser out there, you'd have 500 different browsers being developed to satisfy the gaps gecko leaves in innovation, speed, etc.

You should seriously try a gecko powered browser. If you had, you wouldn't look like an idiot as you wouldn't have posted. ;-)

come on now fewt. Mozilla and NS2 have been far from acceptable for a long time. It does have some very interesting features but it is still a .99 release. Accept that it has faults. I've tried to make the switch from IE to netscape several times but it simply hasn't been ready. It only takes one slip for someone to turn around and say "if it cant do it i know what can."

Oh? I've been using Galeon for months switching to it from Mozilla. I use IE6 at work, and I just don't see any real difference in rendering. I don't have any problems with plugins either, except WMP 7. ;-)

I would like to know what you are doing, because for the life of me, I cannot get Mozilla types to render fonts smoothly or correctly under linux. However, using K-meleon on Windows, I can get fonts rendered smoothly. Could that be because Windows based systems can do "font smoothing", while Linux doesn't have that built in?

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Well, the first thing I do is install true type fonts, though mozilla doesn't use them. (I think .9.9 does though.) I really don't ever have any problems rendering pages. I use RedHat 7.2, maybe the default fonts are different than the O/S you've installed. :-)

WinXP already doesn't have AOL bundled with it, but it'll take time to see if it impacts AOL sign-ups.

Read in the news yesterday that the Netscape search engine in the browser "captures" your IP address and search subject then sends that information to AOL/Netscape. NOT GOOD!

That is ture and was publiclcised two weeks ago.as was smart download tracker already years ago.

But that all is not of interest to AOL, as you use their network anyway and are ALWAYS tracked.

I have used both galleon and netscape 6. Both are second rate browsers. Its really an ego thing for you I think, you can say "o i use galleon im l33t0 anti M$ hax0r"

In reality, you're going to be less productive and purposely depriving yourself of a very good browser for absolutely no reason at all.

"gecko powered" is a bit of an oxymoron.

Why are you so obssesed with privacy? You really shouldn't be worried about it unless you are doing something illegal. And if someone really wants to get information, then they WILL get it.

Tell me there PACO, how will I be less productive? You just had to throw that leet s*** in there to make yourself feel better about the inadequacies in your pants didn't you. Sorry chump, I am just as productive with Galeon as I am with IE. Do you honestly think I would use Galeon if I couldn't get the job done with it? You claim to have used it, but I guarantee you have not.

heh ;-)

BTW if you goto the Windows Media Player directory you should see 3 np*.dll files, if you copy those files to Mozilla's plugin directory and restart it(dont forget to exit shut down the mozilla icon in your system tray if it's there) you should be able to use the WMP plugin.

Thanks for the tip, but it won't work in my O/S. Best I can get in linux is WMP 6.4. It doesn't matter much though because everything out there that requires WMP 7 also streams in QT or REAL. :-)

And no, that wasn't sarcasm.

"Do you honestly think I would use Galeon if I couldn't get the job done with it?"

I'm not specificially talking to you, but a lot of the anti-Microsoft community would use anything other than M$ products regardless of what is better, which is almost always Microsoft :)

I have in fact used galeon on my last linux machine. I found it awkward and slow, as well as (and probably worst of all) unstable. Linux itself is remarkably stable, so I know the OS was fine. I switched over to Opera and found that to be a far more superior browser than NS and Galeon.

As far as inadequacies in my pants, try to refrain from resorting to these kinds of infantile remarks to compensate for your lack of understanding on the subject.

No, it's almost always "good enough"

There is no lack of understanding on this side of the conversation, it's all you. You obviously fail to realize the speed in which software is developed when it is not held up by the mighty dollar. Try it again. ;-)

Not everything private is illegal. How would you like this scenario?..."Dear CPUGuy, We at AOL/Netscape noticed you have an interest in XYZ Anal Itching Creme. We have taken the liberty of sending our new 300 page full color catalog to you. To be sure you get it, we have sent copies to the work and home addresses we have on file for you. Our salesmen will contact you shortly to discuss your selections. Thank you and we hope you enjoy our "Enhanced" browing features."

Doesn't seem to matter WHICH Linux distro I have used- the font rendering has always sucked. From what little I have found out about intalling "True Type Fonts", all the docs take for granted you know most everything about Linux. Same with installing the AC97 Audio drivers for onboard sound. REALLY confussing if you haven't done that kind of thing before.

James Wheat
http://belprecomputerwizard.com

Both of which are inferior to Windows Media Format

Uhh no, Windows Media is no where near the quality of QT. I doubt it ever will be. QT is a professional media format used by every movie house on the planet, I doubt they would use an inferior product. ;-)

I can't testify to which one is better when you're doing professional work where every minute is a gig of data, but when you're talking about internet streams, Quicktime is horrible compared to Windows Media.

Well one, they would only send it one place, and two, they will still ask you if you wanted it.

"when you're talking about internet streams, Quicktime is horrible compared to Windows Media."

Uhh how you figure? In all seriousness, I would like to see an open format take over in place of WMP REAL or QT so platform would no longer matter when viewing media.

i was able to download the mozilla version of aol and am actually very happy with it. It runs slightly faster than internet explorer on my machine but pages do render faster.

But we all know that Microsoft wouldn't follow it :)

And I don't blame them. They are better than standards.

/puts on flame retardant suit

Spoken like a child. :-P

Since netscape is the only browser thats a true progress indicator I'm using it for reference.

i wasnt refering to the rendering. The way NS6 renders pages they scroll more smoothly than IE and render more quickly when it comes to CSS content. I think my most notable problem with netscape is it inability to read some gif control blocks. It simply renders the gif animation as fast as it can so you get these extremely annoying animations fluttering out of control all over.

Another problem with it is its lack of an HTML coder friendly notepad like extension to edit code on webpages. Yes, the syntax is highlighted. Yes you can copy source and save it but i want to edit it on the spot. There is no intuitive script error indicator. In IE I can get a general idea where the errors lie within the page so they can be debugged.

Skins are not properly supported beyond the browser nor are they available in abundance. If you jump from Netscape to another application when coming from a skinned netscape applicatin it does not properly render everything as far as GUI goes.

A word on plugins. I got 3 windows asking me to download a plugin and only one of them worked. In some occasions like when i installed Mozilla .99 to test it I couldnt get the Java 2 plugin to load in Mozilla, only netscape.

And a word on drivers. Scroll wheels on mice dont work all the time. Within a framed window or popup with frames the scroll wheel sometimes will not work.

All tests were run on the latest release of netscape 6.2.1 on a freshly formated computer under windows 2000 sp2. This should be a satisfactory list of complaints. If it isn't perhaps you can check some of the bug boards to get the hundreds left for the developers to fix.

Good "beta" browser. My stance remains. I use IE until they finish this one.

Sorry, I haven't spent much time with Mozilla on the Windows platform, and even less time with Netscape. I have never had a scroll wheel problem, and since I have crossover I haven't ever gotten a plugin popup window. :-)

heres a fun one. Just a screen shot stangly right after I made this last post. 0_o

how bout them apples. Killed netscape, everything rolled back to fine.

http://www.webgamingsolutions.com/beta/error.gif

time for cake and sodomy. :D

well that wasnt a very thurough test then was it ;)

bottom line is consumers will be ambivilent. Developers will stick with what works. IE 5.5 works. NS 6 doesnt cut the mustard.

If mozilla .99 is much better I can't see how yet. Twice its died on me and both times it takes more than 3 minutes to die.

same system, win 2k sp2 with an athlon XP 2000+. Everything else runs without a glitch.

beta beta beta beta beta beta beta beta
http://www.webgamingsolutions.com/beta/error2.gif

Seems DigitalSin hit a raw nerve there fewt :D

I'll have to remember what sets ya off :D

JK :D

Hit a nerve? no.

i dont use aol anyway cos i think its crap. although i dont like microsoft so im glad to see they're switching to netscape. but i dont like netscape either really, switching to opera would of been nice!

I hate to say this about anything aol is involved in, but I think they will get away with this. Mozilla is good now, it seems faster than IE. Iv been using 0.9.9 all today and havent been to a single site that looks odd with it.

I really hate it when I have to admit that something aol is involved in is good.

Mozilla isn't owned by AOL. But AOL (or should I say the Netscape division) is using the Mozilla code. This browser's code is open source, meaning that anyone can use it if they agree with the terms and agreements.

Mozilla is for 90% Netscape, since 90% of developrs work for Netscape.

Now for years web coders have done away with crosss design as the netscpae margin slid more and more, it is under 10% on any traffic i believe by now.AOL at fault since take over for sure for not inproving it.,

NOW, not only does this require a new version but also a FULL version not an upgrade anymore.

So I can see this already ..helloo......soandso........can you please come something is wrong with my Computer......Ithe webpages do not dispaly that i used to have or my passwords are all gone or where are my favorites..why is AOL loading so slow now......
and on and on.........guess what..AOL already the worst support CO that exists, will have millions of calls on this..hehehe......I charge too much trust me my customers will go bolistic........FINALLY the straw to get them completly off.

I teach most of mine anyways to use IE in the background, now it will be interesting to see what happens if mozilla is taking over the rendering through their network or not.

AOL is also loosing customers now more so than ever due to the time warner deal, who wants to pay highspeed and than 9/95 for aol on top ?
They can now gwet the info in seconds, no more Amateur Screens nessescarry...it's all now bamm bamm bamm....and the ads...i do not know of anyone that is not asking me to help them turn them off........

We are going to see some MAJOR Wall Street reaction to this soon.

Yeah, back when AOL agreed to use IE, I claimed it was a pure economic move, in essence, to eliminate as many user support calls of 'this web page doesn't work in your browser'. I admit that looking back now, it was an economic one, but a marketing one mostly. Funny thing is that they pretty much accomplished what I thought they meant to do - meaning squash most all other browsers. But now for whatever reason, obviously money, they are moving away from IE. This won't kill IE, it will simply make a mess of the Net for a while. Eventually, things will get better, as some kind of standards will need to exist. But for the time being, oh well...

AOL is about to screw it's 30+ million customers! - AGAIN! Soon AOL will not be able to send thier customers to Microsoft to fix their screw-ups. 'This page cannot be displayed' will soon be an AOL issue.

AOL users - Do yourselves a favor and remove this 'virus' from your computer!! :)

Really though, what will AOL support techs do when they start getting customers that they sent to Microsoft, and Microsoft sends them back to AOL for Netscape support. Can you say Pissed off customers? Can you say this page will never be displayed again?

Yee of little faith. AOL users dont go ape over anything. They're as placid as drugged up cattle. All they want is instant messaging, loads of junk mail, the generic 2k "you've got mail" sound and big flashy buttons that say "chat room this way". I seriously doubt the move will impeed AOL TIME Warner the media giant and ubber dominating web service in any way shape or form.

Try to think: I use Mozilla and do not have problems viewing pages. So what's the problem? have you all actually used Mozilla?

www.mozilla.org

PS Moz 0.9.9 downloaded about 200000 times. And this is a browser only "for developers and testers"... Think how would grow the Netscape market share after NN6.5 release! It will be a great browser ever released by Netscape. But there's a way to go further and every new release of Mozilla/NN will be better and better.

Also look at the Opera share. It also grow's!

So, the war is just to begin again!

BTW I believe NN6.5 will be released in Aprill-May.

"placid as drugged up cattle" LOL! :)

I love that sense of humor! Almost as sarcastic as mine! :)

Those drugged up cattle might actually start to come out of it now when their favorite porn sites don't come up for 30 seconds :)

LOL!

Netscape technology does suck...

Netscape cant really say that xxx people are now using their platform, as most AOL people are to stupid to even download an alternative browser, same goes for many on the Windoze side aswell though. Perhaps there should be a configuration option in browsers, every browser, that you could set to enable "Advanced mode" which would let those who track browser usage see how many "Standard" and how many "Advanced" users are browsing with the different browsers. Ofcourse, the Advanced users would be those who choosed to use the browser, and not the lamers who dont know any better (like aol users).

Anyway, I like what Jim Cullinan said.. "Netscape technology sucks".. :o)

Using that logic, we can't count IE on 90% of people's computers either.

OMG, this really bites. I specifically designed our company's extranet to be used by IE, as to cut down the amount of code i would have to write. And I know for a fact that some of our customers use AOL to hook up to the extranet. All this means for me is a massive headache as I am forced to go back and rewrite code so that it looks good on both IE and NN. My question is since AOL is going to use NN ans their default browser, will they give the option to use IE also ?

And the moral of this story is: if you write compatible code in the first place then you're not set up for a fall later on.

You can always use Windows Internet Explorer with AOL's connection

I use Mozilla as my main browser and also for development of a web based database used on our local intranet. As we have a couple people in the office using IE, I occasionally will switch to IE to test to see how the pages look. I can't remember anytime recently where I had to make changes to the code because it worked in Mozilla and not IE. This is not Netscape 4.x. (That DOES cause issues.) If you are using IE only tags or CSS then THAT is your problem... not AOL, Mozilla or Netscape's fault. Save yourself a big headache, stop falling into the Microsoft trap, use standard code that will work universaly. Trust me, I have done some really cool stuff with our setup, using standard code, anything you can do with IE only code can be done with standard code. Don't tell me you use Frontpage as well? MANY of the sites that have issues with browsers other than IE - do. Anyhow, before freaking out, you should really grab a copy of Netscape 6.2.1 (since that is based on virtualy the same code as the AOL beta) and try it on your site. You might be surprised that it works without much of a change at all. Or you could grab Mozilla 0.99 and give it a shot. AOL is sure to use a later version of the Gecko code as time goes on. This will give you a heads up on how much work it will take to change your code to standard code.

Should have thought about coding to real standards I suppose. ;-)

Yes, code to the real standards and have it suck in every browser!

Unfortunately few of the standards are properly supported, so you've got to code around the bugs in the browsers. That's easy if you only need to deal with (significantly) IE.

This is going to make the job of a web designer much tougher again... back to the old days I'm afraid :(

I'm a firm believer in working for a living. hahaha

dork.

let me add to that by saying that if you were a web design company that would increase your cost to develop. mmmm.. paying more getting less. thats not very linux :P

Hamburgers can't be $.99 forever. ;-) If it was designed properly, costs wouldn't go up enough to be noticable.

When you or your sales lackeys bid for a job, you should factor the extra 20% of dev time to make the site cross-browser. I learned that during the great 4.0 divide.

If what was designed properly??

Netscape?

Yeah, if Netscape was designed properly then maybe costs wouldn't rise much. But guess what? It's not!

And there lies the problem. NS isn't standards complaint - none of the browsers are, but they should and *could* be.

Then life things would be better for everyone.

"but they should and *could* be."

Yes, I'll agree with that. :-)

I dont... IE sucks, Netscape sucks, AOL sucks... so its one of the most suckiest sucking things that ever sucked. Screw em all!!

Yeah, and while you do that lose functionality in the browser with 85%+ market share to accomodate

After spending 5 years developing browser applications, I have found that IE makes for much more hassle-free programming. The biggest kick...IE actually has a DOM that makes sense. Have you ever tried to figure out the NS DOM... unbelievably incoherent garbage.
Sure, you can develop web pages to work on either browser, but you end up cutting out a lot of features from one or the other.
If you're developing a home page for your mother-in-law's jam-jarring home-business, you can get away with a generic, non-CSS, non-scripted website that works in any browser. If you want a great deal of functionality and features and want to use the browser as a thin client that does amazing things, develop for IE.
The frills of the new NS 6+ browser (skins, etc..) do not make up for it's inability to gracefully show pages, even if they are not compatible. I usually got a hung up browser or a major crash when hitting sites it did not have the ability to properly render...
For that reason, I have un-installed it from my box and do not recommend it to anyone.

The first editions of NS6 were a discrace, try the latest Mozilla and you'll change your mind.

No matter how much market share a browser has (either K-Melon, NS, Opera or IE) in the domain a web developer should support and implement as many w3c open-standards as possible. Developing in HTML or ASP is a significant burden overall.Eveyone knows that IE 5/6 is starts faster simply because Microsoft implemented the runtime files in the OS at boot-up and they threw over $400 million in development costs. Plus a lot of companies want their developers to code using IE specific DHTML and other tags. If you truly want to satisfy the bottom line i suggest that you take some time to learn XML. It works on IE 5+ and NS 6+. However, with XSLT you can transform an XML document to parse to an html, pdf or xhtml file that can be read. XML makes all browser-specific tags irrevalant.

Sean

I'm a firm believer in working as little as possible for the most amount of money. That is the way rich people get and stay rich.

Yes, but they aren't and wont be.............

IE ownz U :)

Well, thats good to hear. Do you happen to be in Hell's Angels? Their "FTW" saying is strangely similar to your outlook.........

IE "ownz" squat, it's going to be the next has been browser.

Ah Ah Ahhhhhh...........Ah Ah Ahhhhhh, whats the magic word?

(Remember the guy who played Newmann in Seinfeld and was a hacker in Jurassic Park)

IE will never be a "has been" Browser

So you would choose to lose my money for that really cool dropdown box? That's just not good business.