Linux is not open source

[ral]

As the concept of open-source takes hold, not only with fanatical individuals but with governments across the world who like the idea of a freely accessible source code, Microsoft is attempting to drive a wedge between the idea of open source and the reality of Linux.

 

Stressing that Linux is 'not free,' Vamos said open source is a development methodology that should not be confused with the commercial nature of Linux distributions...

 

http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index....cfm?newsid=1501

Edited May 5, 2004 by ral

[anacron]

Sounds like he's got the "free beer"/"freedom" thing confused. No matter. The only people who care about his argument know the difference.

 

Interesting, though. The article makes it clear that M$ is having a difficult time dealing with Open Source fanaticism (how do you reason with a fanatic?), so they're trying to redefine Open Source.

[iphitus]

That is the most incoherent incomprehensible and incapable argument ive heard.

[tyme]

That is the most incoherent incomprehensible and incapable argument ive heard.

such big words for such a young boy

 

[Ixthusdan]

That is the most incoherent incomprehensible and incapable argument ive heard.

You've never talked to Microsoft Customer Service, have you?

 

[iphitus]

That is the most incoherent incomprehensible and incapable argument ive heard.

You've never talked to Microsoft Customer Service, have you?

 

Hehehe, no. I save them the effort and reformat windows if it ever has a problem

[zero0w]

The guy needs to straight up his point: is he criticizing Red Hat, or criticizing Linux, or criticizing open source?

 

An unclear message is worse than no message. B)

Edited May 6, 2004 by zero0w

[fred_the_fish]

String i = "";

 

if (i == "silly statement") {

 

System.out.println("Another fine mess you've got us in Bill..");

}

[Gowator]

That is the most incoherent incomprehensible and incapable argument ive heard.

such big words for such a young boy

 

and so RIGHT....

 

what is this guy trying to say ??

 

And on: "I get disturbed when people say open source is the way to go, because it's more secure. It's food for thought that security advisories for Linux and Unix-based operating systems were greater during 2003 than those for Windows and also Linux vulnerabilities are growing faster than Microsoft vulnerabilities."

 

Just one example.

So linux issues advisories more often than Windows.

Yet more people with Windows get hacked.... (not just numbers wise I mean percentage wise)

 

So surely these patches are doing something.... where's the arguament??

 

Linux counts even a MINOR security flaw like an exploit to get access to the games GID (frozen bubble) as serious. Microsift writes them in and doesnt do anything until too late.

 

I cant be bothered to counter any more stupid arguaments becuase its so badly written ....

[ral]

So linux issues advisories more often than Windows.

 

They can say what they want, but Linux boxes dont get killed in the hundred thousands by every new worm created. Windows... gets bugbeared and sassed and so on and so forth.

Edited May 6, 2004 by ral

[iphitus]

We issue advisories more often.....

WOW!!! We find bugs!!!!

 

At least we are capable of finding and correcting bugs in Linux

 

We dont wait till a major worm comes and uses the hole.

[SoulSe]

Well, any governments considering switching over are going to ask governments who already have for advice... not Microsoft themselves.

 

I mean, if you drive a Toyota and you're considering a different make, are you going to contact Toyota themselves to ask if you should? I think not... you'll ask your friend who has driven both.

 

(no weak jokes abou toyota please) :P

[Darkelve]

Well of course not,

 

it's GNU/Linux :lol: