[Leaplist] so true

[Danny W. Burdick]

Bryan

    This was the most informative, calm, and non explosive entry I have 
ever heard from you since I joined this
forum.....tnx for the wonderful and informative feedback within this post...

burdicda


Bryan J. Smith wrote:
> Matthew Cupples <cupplesm at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> can someone tell me why i'm supposed to hate
>> windows/microsoft again?
>>     
>
> There is a lot of Microsoft/Windows bashing on this list regularly.
>
> I have never hated Microsoft, and have defended them regularly on
> this list and others.  I'm a MCSE with several specialties as well.
> As far as deploying the NT-based Windows product, I have been doing
> so on corporate networks the longest of anyone I know.
>
> My "issue" with with Windows is a long-standing set of over-
> promises and not merely under-deliveries, but absolutely *0*
> delivery.  Atop of that, Microsoft will expense and blame its
> own professionals for its own shortcomings, like the patch
> regressions that cause SQL Slammer when it's professionals did
> "stay current" and unpatched themselves against SQL Slammer.
> Microsoft turned around and said it was lack of patching, which
> was not true at all.
>
> And yes, I've seen plenty of people fired for choosing
> Microsoft.  ;)
>
> There's a lot of flak thrown at Novell, Red Hat and, increasingly,
> even Canonical (Ubuntu).  Similar attitudes that are also
> rarely justified.  Red Hat gets beat up for "breaking things"
> all-the-time, yet their efforts become "the standard."  A lot of
> people complain about Mandatory Access Controls (MAC) / Role
> Based Access Controls (RBAC) in SELinux, yet they turn around and
> point the finger at Microsoft for lack of security.
>
> Ironically, Microsoft originally pushed MAC/RBAC long ago.
> And I was there.  ;)
>
>   
>> as far as i knew, linux isn't easy.
>>     
>
> No OS is.  In fact, familiarity is key more than anything.
>
>   
>> that's why we have groups for it.
>>     
>
> We have them for Windows as well.  But a big thing that makes
> Linux different is "community."  It's community developed.
> It's community supported.  It's community.
>
> Windows has been anything but community, except for home users
> when you finally find a neighbor's kid that knows what he or
> she is doing.  That's fine for the SOHO, but not for the
> professional.
>
> The huge difference I've always noticed about Linux, at a
> professional level, is that the "community" doesn't end when
> you hit the enterprise level, like it does for Windows.  Red
> Hat, Novell, IBM, etc... all work together, as a community,
> to solve problems, and expend a sizable amount of money to
> release GPL software everyone benefits from.
>
>   
>> heck, it took me a little while to get the hang of it and
>> I like computers.  imagine someone who doesn't like computers
>> trying to get with it.
>>     
>
> Familiarity is everything.  I don't see Linux as any easier or
> harder than any other OS.  It's familiarity.  Have you ever met
> anyone who has only known Linux?  ;)
>
>   
>> windows is a perfectly fine os.  i've run it for years
>> on my desktop and i've never seen a virus.
>>     
>
> An absolute 100% of compromised Windows systems where people
> don't know they have been compromised have a virus.  It is
> currently predicted that over 20% of the Windows systems on
> the Internet are compromised.
>
> I was there, in 1992-1993, when NT came out with MAC/RBAC.
> And I also saw 100% of Microsoft's own developers ignore it,
> and Visual Studio tools utterly fail to implement required
> functions for it.  By 1994, the "people" won on Chicago, and
> NT utterly died as promised.  Since then we've had codenames
> for Microsoft vaporware.
>
> Today people run with "Administrator" under Windows, are
> compromised and don't know it.  They don't know the first thing
> about network and host security, detection and other things.
> Ignorance is the rule, not the exception.
>
>   
>> granted, many people do see them and you state that as facts
>> as to why you don't use windows.  of course, the same people
>> who get viruses on windows are likely the same people who
>> have trouble with linux.
>>     
>
> Indeed.  It's not the OS, but the mindset.  Windows let you do
> really stupid things from a security standpoint.  Even MacOS X
> has a few things that do as well.
>
>   
>> if you're as knowledgeable as i am (or more than i am in most
>> of your cases) , you can do just fine in windows without
>> viruses or malware. 
>>     
>
> "Fine" is subjective.
>
>   
>> it blows my mind as to why you hate it so much.
>>     
>
> I've grown tired of it in the past, but it's not my job to say
> anything.  After all, people grow tired of me -- from defending
> Microsoft to pointing out when people make repeat mistakes and
> don't learn from them.  So I largely keep my mouth shut.
>
> But I think too many people over-state how "easy" Windows is.
> As someone who has worked in huge enterprise environments, Linux
> is 10x as easy and I can support 10x as many Linux systems, as
> I can Windows systems.  That's before even looking at the security
> aspects.
>
> Windows is a deployment and support nightmare.
>
>   
>> please someone tell me why we hate it so i can jump on the
>> bandwagon.
>>     
>
> Because they want to talk in terms of "evil" be judgemental.
>
> They were the same ones saying the same about IBM and saying
> "Microsoft is better."  They are now the same ones saying it
> about Microsoft and "Google is better."
>
> As someone who has deployed Red Hat solutions in corporate
> networks for a dozen years now, they've been complaining about
> Red Hat for years too.  And I used to defend Red Hat well before
> I became an employee.
>
> In the end, we've had a lot of corporations bashed over
> such blind rhetoric.  We've had a lot of employees of these
> companies harmed as a result.  And hardly has any of it been
> justified.
>
> But I've gotten in trouble enough in the past when I've pointed
> out someone's intolerance and inconsideration to make any
> direct, specific complaints today.  Especially when I knew some
> of the good people behind the companies, and the baseless
> accusations being made against their efforts -- it's just not
> worth it.
>
> Same deal here.  Just ignore it.
>
>
>   

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.