[Leaplist] Re: A letter to my Windows friends...

[Chris]

Charity Abbott wrote:

> No version of wine works with EQ. They may claim that older versions 
> of winex or cedega supported wine, but this is a lie. It worked only 
> if you liked random crashes, missing textures and about 500 times the 
> bugs if you were running directly under windows. Also, you need a 
> currently supported program anyway because they are constantly coming 
> out with new expansions and using the new features of DirectX. The 
> game will not run without the very latest directx9.0c dlls. EQ even 
> checks this for you and purposefully closes the game if it doesn't 
> find what it's looking for. I know I'm just complaining, but I have 
> done my homework on this one.
>
> I don't need support for Windows. It runs just fine. In the 10 years 
> I've owned a Windows machine, I've had one virus that caused any 
> noticeable effect which I cleaned from my machine myself.
>
> My point is even though Windows may be the worst OS out there, there 
> are some things you still can't do without it. No one is asking you to 
> support it. The letter seems to be missing these key points.
>
>  
>

Actually, yes, I am asked to support it - frequently. But that's not
my primary point. Everyone is asked to support it. A huge amount
of the crap on the Internet is due purely to the abysmal development
practices of the Redmond folks.

You are asked to support Windows when you have to pay for virus
protection. You are asked to support Windows with every piece of
spam you have to delete. You are asked to support Windows in the
hidden costs of your Internet providers wasting time and resources
dealing with the garbage that Windows brings to the Internet.

The things that can be done "Only In Windows" are very often things
that should not be done. Period. There's a reason some of these things
can only be done in Windows - they're just a bad idea to start with.

But in the last few years, one thing has become apparent to me as
the nature of my business has changed. The vast and overwhelming
bulk of home users, which are the low-hanging fruit for those who
exploit this defective platform are doing nothing - absolutely nothing
that they couldn't do in Linux - in many cases without ever knowing
the difference.

I got accused of "blindly" suggesting Linux. It's far from blind. The
most clueless users are the ones most likely to have exploited
machines. And, not coincidentally, the very least likely to need
something that only Windows offers.

Are you a Windows power user? Fine - you're a very small part of
the problem I present. But if your idea of using your computer is
some surfing, doing some email, listening to some music and
getting pictures of your grandkids from your camera - then you
have no real needs that a more secure and stable platform can't
provide.

As far as antivirus goes - I have my suspicions there. Gone
are the days when script kiddies were poking around with VB
scripts. The new exploits come from well payed, skilled and
knowledgeable (but criminal) developers. I really wonder if these
enterprises can't afford a copy of Symantec or McAfee to test
their exploits against. What do you think?

And as far as only one virus with noticeable effect, the same
point applies. The new breed of criminals go to great pains to
ensure that you don't notice. Spam relays are being throttled
down - timing mechanisms are used to minimize network
hits that would stick out like a sore thumb on any monitor software.

Some trojans even take care to remove other trojans - not only
are they competitors for the same prey - but too much of a good
thing might be noticed.

Windows is a comforting fantasy - much like the Easter
Bunny and Santa Claus (sorry for the spoiler). But the truth
is, the people who are at the greatest risk of being betrayed
by their operating systems are almost precisely those who
don't need that O/S to start with.

Windows for Joe or Joan sixpack is exactly the wrong platform,
and exactly the desktop that Linux IS ready for.

Cheers,

Chris