Cisco exec: Windows Vista is scary

Cnet ^ | 09/18/2006 | Tom Espiner

[Lexinom]

I am for all those things as well. Loose coupling, tight cohesion is the ideal at which to aim. At one time, Microsoft with its COM model was a major champion of encapsulation.

Because of things like this ("SPAM filtering is part of the OS") Windows should be considered an Operating Environment, because it goes way beyond the traditional bounds of an operating system. The OS should be a layer on top of which one could build a GUI. That is how X works, running on top of the Linux kernel.

[antiRepublicrat]

but then that test isn't a valid measurement of bandwidth.

It is a valid measurement of a common situation in the Windows world. If you don't have those, you probably have A/V, adware sensing, etc., which also either slows the network or puts more of a burden on your machine, making the WWW appear slow.

Otherwise, you're probably right, but it does all add up.

[js1138]

I'm a little curious why you would benchmark an eight year old version of Windows and present it without comment, as relevant.

[martin_fierro]

I'm a little curious why you would benchmark an eight year old version of Windows and present it without comment, as relevant.

• Because Linux runs better on the hardware than 98SE.
• Because XP won't run on a K-7.

For starters.

[js1138]

So if you have an old computer, Linux is better. I can buy that, for what it's worth. But I could pick up newer and faster hardware, week end and week out, at garage sales for five bucks a pop.

A motherboard with an AMD64/3000 can be had for about $120.

[martin_fierro]

I'm a little curious as to why I would go to a garage sale, shell out extra cash for unknown hardware with no warranty, and install a crappier OS on it...

...when I could recycle known hardware with a better, free OS.

[Tijeras_Slim]

I'm a little curious as to why I would go to a garage sale, shell out extra cash for unknown hardware with no warranty, and install a crappier OS on it...

Stop being such a purist....

[dfwgator]

[martin_fierro]

You Mac f r e a k .

< |:)~

[js1138]

Stop being such a purist....

I suppose that's one word for it.

I'm not going to slam anyone's hobby. I just happen to have Windows versions of some very expensive programs -- worth far more than the hardware -- and I don't have any incentive to fiddle around.

I spent 10 years as a UNIX programmer and have no more interest in it, unless a program comes along that I need.

[Tijeras_Slim]

Gotcha, have about $20K of software on my work laptop. I don't care as long as stuff works.

[Echo Talon]

thats what ya call FUD my boy. :)

[steve-b]

Yes, any application consuming significant network bandwidth will leave less available for a speed test, but then that test isn't a valid measurement of bandwidth. Such applications should be terminated prior to running a valid test.

I believe that the original point is that the applications in question (Windows spyware phoning home. Botnet trojan participating in a DDOS.) embed themselves into Windows systems and defy attempts to terminate them.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

That one little word is what will kill Micro$oft.

My first thought exactly. This could have a very large backlash if MS isn't very careful.

But, how does one stop The Juggernaut?

[Lexinom]

No one needs to "stop" them. They are an unfortunate reality whose foibles will affect millions of businesses and individuals.