[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Full-Disclosure] Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux
- To: "Helmut Hauser" <helmut.hauser@intraplan.de>
- Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Microsoft prepares security assault on Linux
- From: Jeremiah Cornelius <jeremiah@nur.net>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:48:25 -0800
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wednesday 12 November 2003 10:33, Georgi Guninski wrote:
<SNIP>
> A user told me: "Yesterday i bought a computer. played the windows game all
> day long, but couldn't win once [1]"
Here's a recent bit from Doc "Cluetrain" Searles along these lines. It is in
response to the Novell acquisition of SuSE, but outlines very succinctly
those things represented by Linux/Apache/etc. that are outside the scope or
interest of MS or /any/ vendor.
http://www.ssc.com/pipermail/suitwatch/2003-November/000058.html
| Linux isn't a vendor product. Never was, never will be. It's not even
| a product. It's a project by a development community that includes
| many vendors but isn't driven by any of them. Same goes for other
| members of the LAMP suite, with the single exception of MySQL, which
| owns the code (making it, in that sense, proprietary) but locates
| development squarely inside the community rather than in its own
| corporate container. In other words, they are very
| unvendor-like--market-compliant, I'd say.
|
| Development communities like Linux's grew out of the need to do what|
| vendors couldn't do or wouldn't do. That doesn't make vendors bad or
| anything; it just puts them in perspective. They can't do everything,
| and now they don't have to.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/sqqpJi2cv3XsiSARAtn5AKCoLUDQYrAceya4+lSAt2/T8PL72wCfUAXa
vyO+zknoQ7PwLRDbsvSdvrI=
=HL+P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html