Microsoft doesn't seem to want China/Japan/S. Korea to develope their own OS because it would be an unfair competition. How ironic is that?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=569&ncid=738&e=1&u=/nm/20030905/tc_nm/tech_windows_rival_dc

IT was kind of like South Korea subsidizing Hynix


If Sony and the other companies want to pool to make an OS then fine,

Having the government do it is wrong

"IT was kind of like South Korea subsidizing Hynix


If Sony and the other companies want to pool to make an OS then fine,

Having the government do it is wrong"

I don't see where there is anything wrong with this. I didn't understand it as saying that the government would force this OS on the citizens. If these governments are tired of depending on Microsoft for the security of their systems, why not create their own OS where they would be responsible for the security and not have to wait for microsoft to release patches.

"unfair competition".. it's a good one

IT was kind of like South Korea subsidizing Hynix


If Sony and the other companies want to pool to make an OS then fine,

Having the government do it is wrong

I don't see where there is anything wrong with this. I didn't understand it as saying that the government would force this OS on the citizens. If these governments are tired of depending on Microsoft for the security of their systems, why not create their own OS where they would be responsible for the security and not have to wait for microsoft to release patches.

The problem is you are asking MS to comptete not only with Sony, And Hyndai and other huge Asian Corporations, but also money from those governments


Bro MS warns months ahead with patches and fixes.

I had my systems patched no less then 1 months before the last worm hit

Try administering 100 Linux boxes when a security flaw is found.

www.cert.org

Also, how fast do you think a government would be in having patches released? I mean really, many governments can't do anything in a timely manner, even when a large project that is either core funded annually, or one with a large amount of funding for a limited time (1-3 years) is involved. Plus, since governments are now regulating software, it does seem rather unfair that a government would throw out its own version of an OS. They are the ones writing the laws for software, and now they are going to release their own? Gee, I wonder what OS would be favored then...

Also, the whole thing with security is total BS. If people even bothered to use the basic security tools that are freely available from MS, and enabled their firewalls on XP, or filtered ports with 2K, most of this wouldn't even be an issue. Plus, all of those office exploits were addressed a long time ago in the simple security releases that went all the way back to Outlook 98, but so many people are too lazy or ignorant of these issues. Yet, these are the same morons that scream about security. If they put half as much effort into maintain their systems as they do complaining about them, there wouldn't be much of a user base to support these outbreaks. I say let them make their own OS, and see how "easy" it is to do so. Better yet, I want to see how they plan on releasing the source of it and still use it in government facilities. That will be nice.

It best to keep yourself on a router w/firewall than not to. Persoanlly, the most destructive viruses are boot sector virues so it's a good idea to enable Trend AV in the BIOS. I've nerver been hit by either a worm or virus, so the only reason I rebuild is do to fix a problem I have. Most of the time I can use either the first repair mode or the second repair mode in Win2K. I wonder how many people would be hit by a virus or worm if they followed proper useage of a system? I mean you wouldn't treat your car like some treat their systems, would you?

"Also, how fast do you think a government would be in having patches released? I mean really, many governments can't do anything in a timely manner, even when a large project that is either core funded annually, or one with a large amount of funding for a limited time (1-3 years) is involved. Plus, since governments are now regulating software, it does seem rather unfair that a government would throw out its own version of an OS. They are the ones writing the laws for software, and now they are going to release their own? Gee, I wonder what OS would be favored then...

Also, the whole thing with security is total BS. If people even bothered to use the basic security tools that are freely available from MS, and enabled their firewalls on XP, or filtered ports with 2K, most of this wouldn't even be an issue. Plus, all of those office exploits were addressed a long time ago in the simple security releases that went all the way back to Outlook 98, but so many people are too lazy or ignorant of these issues. Yet, these are the same morons that scream about security. If they put half as much effort into maintain their systems as they do complaining about them, there wouldn't be much of a user base to support these outbreaks. I say let them make their own OS, and see how "easy" it is to do so. Better yet, I want to see how they plan on releasing the source of it and still use it in government facilities. That will be nice."

it's been a long time coming. also amusing is other countries goverments considering a switch to linux instead of micro$oft products