Posted on 09/17/2007 6:13:24 AM PDT by webschooner
I’m running Vista, and it has some serious issues, but no more particularly than any other Microsoft product roll out. The one heartening thing is that they finally seem to be paying some attention to revamping their security model. Mostly half-measures, but better than nothing.
I fail to see why this is Microsoft's fault. The instruction set for the Intel processors has been well known for a long time, so anyone who wants to write a competing operating system can. If MS had entered into some sort of agreement with Intel to keep the details secret then I could see a problem, but that didn't happen (as far as I know at least).
We've seen other competitors, such as Apple, Commodore, Sun, Radio Shack, etc. People "adopt" what works best for them, and in that regard MS has managed to deliver despite all the "I hate big corporations" sentiment that tends to follow success.
You’re missing the point. I didn’t say that Intel proprietary standards were the problem. I said that MS proprietary standards as de facto public standards are the problem.
Suppose that Intel kept the interface to its processors proprietary, then developed its own applications to run on them. And suppose their applications were the first on the block and became de facto public standards. Then you would have a situation like the MS situation today.
Tour argument in the paragraph above has merit, because DOS was the first widley distributed OS. However, Office (especially word) wasn't the first, or the second or even the third. It was simply superior to Lotus, Wordperfect, Wordstar and the like.
Coke kept it's formula secret, and yet Pepsi managed to compete (followed by many others). Why should someone be forced to give out their secrets?
"De Facto standards" implies people chose to adopt them, it doesn't mean anyone forced or tricked them into adopting them.
“I fail to see why this is Microsoft’s fault. The instruction set for the Intel processors has been well known for a long time, so anyone who wants to write a competing operating system can.”
One more point. No, it’s not Microsoft’s “fault.” It’s the public’s fault for falling for it. MS just milks public ignorance to the hilt.
And you missed the point about lock in. Yes, of course anyone else could write their own Intel-based OS, but few users would want to use it because there would be no software available for it initially, and few developers would write apps for it because there would be no users initialy. It’s a chicken/egg situation. That’s what “platform dependence” is all about.
The only reason MS didn’t have that problem is because they were selected on a whim by IBM as the first default OS for the PC.
You are correct on all counts, and not off your rocker. =)
I was looking at the issue with network architecture in mind. Broadband ISPs typically keep their subscriber addresses in blocks(subnets). Using Routers and or Firewalls, it is possible to deny OUTGOING tcp 25 from all of those home subscriber subnets, while allowing outgoing tcp 25 for business customers, or those with static addresses. Depending on the ISP’s network, this could cause errors with ‘pop clients’ and port 25 trying to send, but I’m sure the ISP could choose a non-standard port other than tcp 25. Or go with a web based email solution as you mentioned earlier, which is better than a ‘pop client’ IMHO.
I’m also curious as to why ISPs don’t set up an MTA using Postfix to process and relay mail before it exits the perimeter of the ISP’s network. Postfix is very versatile in what it can do with email. It can reject messages if a client attempts to send too many messages within a predefined amount of time. That would stop spam bots in their tracks when they attempt to flood using a dictionary attack. Postfix can also do RBL checking. That’s just a couple out of many many other things that an ISP using Postfix can do against outgoing mail.
ISPs can do similar things and stop 99% of incoming spam destined for subscribers using totally free software and Linux. There is no excuse at all for internet subscribers to get hammered daily with email spam. It isn’t difficult to setup and doesn’t cost a dime. I know if I can do it, a large ISP with virtually unlimited resources sure as hell can.
Yes, but don’t forget that MS controlled the OS that all those Office suites ran on, so they had an artificial advantage. And they were notorious for throwing underhanded gotchas into the OS to hamper the competing office suites.
I am not claiming that MS Office had no technical merit. What I am saying is that it did not compete on a level playing field. And now that their proprietary formats are de facto public standards, the playing field is ridiculously slanted.
“Coke kept it’s formula secret, and yet Pepsi managed to compete (followed by many others). Why should someone be forced to give out their secrets?”
But Pepsi didn’t need to know anything about Cokes secret formula to develop one of their own. That is precisely the opposite of the situation in the PC industry. Anyone who wishes to develop software for the masses needs to know something about Windows — but they cannot possibly know as much as MS knows about it because it is *PROPRIETARY* — not to mention occasionally making arbitrary changes for no technical reason other than to throw off the competition.
And anyone who wishes to compete with MS Office must make it compatible or no one can afford to use it. And MS works overtime to make it difficult to achieve compatibility with MS Office by keeping their formats *PROPRIETARY*!
Are you starting to get it yet?
Should some company have a copyright on the English language? Of course not. Why?
Because public standards should not be based on proprietary standards and formats.
That's all I've ever wanted to see.
The unfortunate thing is that even Microsoft don't seem to know how their software works.
Open interfaces are good for consumers.
This would half solve it, if a computer gets infected it generally sends spam out to legit mail servers. So unless you want to tell folks on your network you cant use AOL or Google with smtp clients you *have* to use us this aint going to fly.
I’m also curious as to why ISPs don’t set up an MTA using Postfix to process and relay mail before it exits the perimeter of the ISP’s network.
While *alot* of mail gets sent via relay servers I dont think thats the major source anymore. An infected system does not need to relay, if can send directly and the spammer who infected the system is still anonymous.
ISPs can do similar things and stop 99% of incoming spam destined for subscribers using totally free software and Linux.
With traditional mail this is true but the storm net you have so many clients sending it from, literally, all over the world the end solution is mail server content filtering..
Thats an awful analogy! If all sodas needed to run on top of coke *then* you might be able to salvage something from that mess.
Continue to offer de-contented Windows as “Windows Euro,” and add a surcharge to each copy as a “litigation charge.”
I actually have a problem with this. I don't use my ISP for email. I've had the same email address for over 10 years now, as I use an email forwarding service, (pobox.com). I also use them for sending my mail. When outgoing port 25 is blocked, it prevents me from sending mail. It's a major pain in the ass when I change ISPs and have to browbeat their "tech support" department to unblock that port on my address. On the plus side, it generally results in my IP address being really stable because they'll unblock by IP, and tie the IP to my MAC.
You really can’t do that, because you’re leaving an umbrella for a would-be competitor to exploit.
Zeg, you said it... I don't pay 50$ a month for them to filter our ports I might need.
“They should be sued for producing Vista.”
They should be shot. Biggest piece of garbage.
Those who don't think the EU uses its laws to competitive advantage...are naive.
“Continue to offer de-contented Windows as “Windows Euro,” and add a surcharge to each copy as a “litigation charge.””
Man, how I wish guys like you were advising Microsoft. If they tried that, they’d just wake up the masses to the fact that they don’t really need MS. MS would get their clock cleaned.
Lets not forget the famous AARD code.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.