dual boot with windows xp and suse linux 9.0

[iamroot]

People are not as non-tech -savvy as they were in the early years of the computer. Sooner or later, no amount of noose tightening is going to help Microsoft.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

LOL! Saying it twice is not going to help it.

Fact of the matter is, people are getting more Tech-Savvy; and as a result of such Microsoft is going to have to change - not with its tactics of making people pay and buying intellectual property everywhere; which although for some reason people hate them doing such, the users gain from the availability of the Support, the Updates, MSN, the help and the huge usability of Microsoft.

I seriously believe that Mac is doomed from the release of Longhorn to a couple of months after the release of Blackcomb. What Linux will have to do to not suffer this fate from whatever wierdly-code-named Version of Windows Preceeds Blackcomb is to stop focusing on taking down Microsoft - or releasing the people from 'The Evil Shackles of Microsoft's Monopoly' but to start focussing on the Software, the GUI, and the Usability. They will also, to achieve more than 5 or 6% of all Computers, have to stop Open-Source all together. Its not safe for the general populous; and soon enough people will realise that.

 

[root]

I think open-source is safe, it's generally accepted that there are more people out there trying to fix it than there is trying to break it. Open source projcets tend to move a lot quicker than closed sour ce projects do, simply because of the sheer number of people working on them!

You can buy linux in a box, yet you are rarely actually buying linux you are buying a support contract from the software vendor, For instance up until the recent release of redhat enterprise linux, pervious versions (1-9) were available for download, without support, and available for purchase either from computer shops or direct from the vendor, with a support contract that meant 24hour phone support.

I think this is a much better way of releasing software since then people that feel the need for tech support pay for the support, and those confident/knowledgable enough not to need tech support are not paying for a service they don't use.

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

I think open-source is safe, it's generally accepted that there are more people out there trying to fix it than there is trying to break it. Open source projcets tend to move a lot quicker than closed sour ce projects do, simply because of the sheer number of people working on them!

You can buy linux in a box, yet you are rarely actually buying linux you are buying a support contract from the software vendor, For instance up until the recent release of redhat enterprise linux, pervious versions (1-9) were available for download, without support, and available for purchase either from computer shops or direct from the vendor, with a support contract that meant 24hour phone support.

I think this is a much better way of releasing software since then people that feel the need for tech support pay for the support, and those confident/knowledgable enough not to need tech support are not paying for a service they don't use.

Do you think that there would still be a majority of people trying to fix it than trying to break it if it had the 92% or so of all the Computers in the World? I doubt that seriously. And with Open Source; even if there was a Minority of people trying to break into it, with Open-Source it would be so much easier to do so.

 

[root]

hmm, yes but it also means that there are pleny of people there to identify the error and apply the patch. Also when the exploit is released users can download and patch the source themselves if they can't wait till the official release!

 

[Lord Kalthorn]

Hmm, thats a point - but could a normal everyday user do that?