Tweet
AKA Microsoft Vs REALITY
Not sure if this belongs here or in ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLES, but figured
better here than MATROX HARDWARE
The Following is Microsoft's recent rant against LINUX:
"With all the recent attention around Linux as an operating system it's important to step back from the hype and look at the reality. First, it's worth noting that Linux is a UNIX-like operating system. Linux fundamentally relies on 30-year-old operating system technology and architecture*a*. Linux was not designed from the ground-up to support symmetrical multiprocessing (SMP)*b*, graphical user interfaces (GUI)*c*, asynchronous I/O, fine-grained security model*d*, and many other important characteristics of a modern operating system*e*. These architectural limitations mean that as customers look for a platform to cost effectively deploy scalable, secure*f*, and robust applications*g*, Linux simply cannot deliver on the hype. "
Well, let's see now...
*a* Old, established, emulated, and working VERSUS Windows?. Yeah I can see why MS doesn't like that!
*b* smp? Funny my old original versions of Windows (as far back as WIN 1.x ...oh the horror..the humanity..quiet sonny) weren't able to do SMP! Infact the most popular selling version(s) of Windows still can't do SMP!
*c* Was Windows designed from the ground-up to support GUI? Funny, I thought it was still based and built on top of DOS. What a great GUI system it had...NOT!!!
*d* Security? Security? Let's think which OS is it that they keep finding like 2 hole in, on a good week! Which OS do they keep having to post security patches and work arounds for. I think I'll move on.
*e* I guess by 'important characteristics of a modern operating system', they mean overpriced, forced on consumers, and able to generate even more money on support and training. Yeah, that must be it?
*f* Which OS programs keep getting infected by MACRO viruses, and such. Also see *d*.
*g* I guess MS is now using 'robust' as a euphemism for fat bloatware, busting at the seams, unable to be contained and spilling out across all other programs space and the OS?
Guess the boys in Redmond must really be getting scard.
The original can be found
here if anyone want to read MS's $&!^.
Mark F.
------------------
OH NO, my retractable cup holder swallowed a CD
[This message has been edited by Mark F (edited 10-06-1999).]
Not sure if this belongs here or in ALTERNATIVE LIFESTYLES, but figured
better here than MATROX HARDWARE
The Following is Microsoft's recent rant against LINUX:
"With all the recent attention around Linux as an operating system it's important to step back from the hype and look at the reality. First, it's worth noting that Linux is a UNIX-like operating system. Linux fundamentally relies on 30-year-old operating system technology and architecture*a*. Linux was not designed from the ground-up to support symmetrical multiprocessing (SMP)*b*, graphical user interfaces (GUI)*c*, asynchronous I/O, fine-grained security model*d*, and many other important characteristics of a modern operating system*e*. These architectural limitations mean that as customers look for a platform to cost effectively deploy scalable, secure*f*, and robust applications*g*, Linux simply cannot deliver on the hype. "
Well, let's see now...
*a* Old, established, emulated, and working VERSUS Windows?. Yeah I can see why MS doesn't like that!
*b* smp? Funny my old original versions of Windows (as far back as WIN 1.x ...oh the horror..the humanity..quiet sonny) weren't able to do SMP! Infact the most popular selling version(s) of Windows still can't do SMP!
*c* Was Windows designed from the ground-up to support GUI? Funny, I thought it was still based and built on top of DOS. What a great GUI system it had...NOT!!!
*d* Security? Security? Let's think which OS is it that they keep finding like 2 hole in, on a good week! Which OS do they keep having to post security patches and work arounds for. I think I'll move on.
*e* I guess by 'important characteristics of a modern operating system', they mean overpriced, forced on consumers, and able to generate even more money on support and training. Yeah, that must be it?
*f* Which OS programs keep getting infected by MACRO viruses, and such. Also see *d*.
*g* I guess MS is now using 'robust' as a euphemism for fat bloatware, busting at the seams, unable to be contained and spilling out across all other programs space and the OS?
Guess the boys in Redmond must really be getting scard.
The original can be found
here if anyone want to read MS's $&!^.
Mark F.
------------------
OH NO, my retractable cup holder swallowed a CD
[This message has been edited by Mark F (edited 10-06-1999).]