I guess it was obvious that this is how this thread would end up after the first post. Still, I am disappointed and disgusted by the fact that it actually dipped to the low of one person calling the other a dumb ass, followed by someone else showing enthusiastic support for it. For the record, I thought that Ryan brought up some valid points. It's obvious though, that too many of the people on this list are too far gone to acknowledge them. What Linux users fail to acknowledge in too many cases is that part of the reason Microsoft products "cause" such problems is a result of the product being designed for _users_ who *don't* "worry about administering their own boxes". If they weren't so popular in the first place, there wouldn't be so many people trying to maliciously target them. To further that logic, if a comparable Unix app was to replace a Windows app at that level of popularity (and thus scrutiny), it would likely have just as many errors, just as many exploits. Why are the mistakes made by Linux developers any less severe? Mostly because there aren't as many clueless users to propagate the exploits. Frankly, before Microsoft had such problems with OS vulnerabilities, the default installations of virtually no Linux platform were secure (for example, a telnet port accepting connections in a default setup used to be done all the time in many, if not all, the popular distributions). After Microsoft had security problems, it then became a more commonly-known fact that security is an issue. Then, and only then, did the Linux distros really start to worry about secure setups in their installations. And the result is a system that is unquestionably more secure, *and* more difficult to setup and maintain. Let's face the facts - Microsoft releases fixes for mistakes they've made and Linux developers release fixes for mistakes they've made. And sure, some of the mistakes Microsoft have made are the result of poor decision-making, particularly regarding security issues. However The fact remains that the world has yet to see an absolutely *perfect* piece of software released by anyone, anywhere, for any operating system. The closest thing would be the software that controls such things as airplanes or nuclear reactors - and if you thought Microsoft was expensive, you don't even want to think about the expense to verify and certify the code in these types of installations. Fortunately, that level of perfection is not necessary for the vast majority of users, which is why Microsoft has done so well despite the problems it does have. The fact remains that the average user doesn't really care all that much about whether they have to reboot the computer once a day, week, or month. Someday, if the Linux snobs of the world don't wake up and consider that Microsoft might be able to address its issues effectively in future releases, they are going to find themselves wondering how Windows got so good while Linux went nowhere. Fortunately (and unfortunately in the sense that the snobs of the Linux world will continue to delude themselves) Linux is not likely to fall behind, because not all of the Linux community has placed themselves in a Linux bubble and isolated themselves from everything Windows. Good day, Dan Churchill On Saturday 27 July 2002 07:38 am, James Louis wrote: > Yea. You go Ben! :-) > > -----Original Message----- > From: tclug-list-admin at mn-linux.org > [mailto:tclug-list-admin at mn-linux.org]On Behalf Of Ben Lutgens > Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 10:28 AM > To: tclug-list at mn-linux.org > Subject: Re: [TCLUG] Re: Help! The boss wants an exchange server!!! > > On Fri, Jul 26, 2002 at 06:30:24AM -0500, Ryan Ware wrote: > >Just like most of you I don't like Microsoft's direction, but we > >have Windows clients. Sure I could run Samba to get a few more > >Linux boxes in place, but then I am setting myself up for Microsoft > >service packs that break Samba for the clients and then having to > >wait for the Samba project to work around it. "sorry user, I'll > >have you back to your files real soon now." > > Sound like operator head-space-timing (a.k.a. PEBKAC) I've been using > samba in a production environ for almost 3 years with out a single > "sorry user, I'll have you back to your files real soon now." > > Maybe you're just a dumbass.