Another reason to hate the dark side

[ade234uk]

It seems to me that lots of people are interested in freedom when they want to use their computer. They dont want to be told what to do however people are still being restrained.

However look at Java & Firefox these are two great examples of what happens when companies create a peice of software that is cross platform and works to gracefully know one knows the difference.

It also shows what is acheivable when people contribute especially Firefox and help each other not for financial gain but for love of the project and trying to make the computing world a better place.

However we still have these bully boys over at the dark side playing the same old game, telling companies how bad open source is for their business and how much money its going to cost them to migrate. How dangerous open source is to their business. However they never mention once about Viruses, Spyware and other parasites becuase we dont have any and that is one thing that really gets up their noses.

However how the hell are the likes of Ubuntu meant to get a fair playing when the dark side are so anti competetive and scaring every average Joe out there away from Open source computing.

Im sorry it does really annoy me. Next thing I hear is that people may not be able to install Linux next to Windows on their hard drive as Microsoft are trying to stop this.

Is this true? if it this is a complete traversty for the world of computing and very very anti competetive.

[sapo]

I dont have windows installed for a long time, but i still have to work in a windows 98 box... but if microsoft blocks us for running linux alongside with windows, we just have to uninstall windows and everything will be fine :)

[jc87]

Another reason ? i already hate the dark side for this reason along time ago:smile: .

Use the force young padawan , Lord Obiwallman , Lord Yorvalds , and the others jedi´s will help you , and protect you from the evil darthsigates , and his pupil darthvasoft.

[Rackerz]

Stop us from using Linux along with Windows? I'd like to see them try and get away with it :p. Even if they managed to do that successfully someone would come up with a fix, they always do.

[ardchoille]

I haven't used Windows in many years because every Linux distro I have used allows me to do everything I need to do. Let Microsoft disable the ability to set up a dual-boot system, doesn't matter to me because I don't use their software. My idea of a dual-boot system is Ubuntu and KUbuntu :)

[Hygelac]

ardchoille:
Agreed, that's the proper way to do dual-booting. :cool:
Or in my case, I'm thinking of KUbuntu and Slackware (just running Ubuntu on an old computer until I get a new one that I want to dual-boot those from).

[prizrak]

Someone on this forum mentioned Ghandi already. I don't remember the quote but basically in the end you win. MS has been doing everything in their power for years to keep people on Windows, yet many switch to Linux everyday. Firefox gained a double digit market share in a matter of months and that's despite the fact that most sites are optimized for IE.

[rjwood]

I personally believe microsoft is employing a bad strategy. Bullies can only be bullies, as long as they can play hide and seek. Microsoft seems to be saying "yea we're big and we're powerful and we will do what we want when we want to". It's only a matter of time in my opinion before another bully comes along and kicks their ass back to reality. It may be another company or a govenment or even a bunch of rag-tag computer users that refuse to submit (sound familiar?) that just keeps on growing and growing. ;)

[BSDFreak]

I don't hate CS/MS/Windows or whatever you consider the dark side to be, why should i?

People need to realize that CS and FOSS are from two distinctly different schools of thought and that that is just fine.

In CS, you make your living by selling your software, of course you are going to want as many as possible to use it and of course you are going to use whatever tools you have available to make it so. Nothing strange or inherently wrong with that, is there?

I couldn't really care less if more people use FOSS than CS, it doesn't bother me in the least that windows users are so many more than Linux users, it doesn't affect me. For some reason the newer users of FOSS have a need to "convert" people to their preferred software, it's almost like evangelicals and i can tell you that it drives more people away than it "converts" since most of them don't really want it, they try to install it, realize it's different from windows and walk away, if there is no will to learn, they will not take the time to do so.

Personally i prefer the small userbase of Linux for a very good reason, the more users that come into Linux the more confusing it will get, instead of learning the ways of the system they want it adapted to their preferred way of handling it instead of learning the way it's done in Linux, example: I have seen numerous cases where users want a program to install into "program files" or an equivalent instead of putting it's config files in etc, it's binaries in one of the bin folders (which of the folders depends on what type of program you are installing, which distro or which system) and so on.

Many newer users want Linux to turn in to some sort of windows copy cat product because it would cater to the windows users and convert more users, well, it would also make it into a suckier version of something these people already use and it would STILL not convert anyone, it's not windows, never will be, if it bothers you then either learn to do it the *nix way and love it or use a system that is more to your liking.

[ubuntu27]

Stop us from using Linux along with Windows? I'd like to see them try and get away with it :p. Even if they managed to do that successfully someone would come up with a fix, they always do.
Looks at this, now they want to lock us out.

From the page: "Multi-tiered Data Protection

Advanced data protection technologies in Windows Vista reduce the risk that data on laptops or on other computers will be viewed by unauthorized people, even if the laptop is lost or stolen.

Windows Vista supports full-volume encryption to prevent disk access to files by other operating systems. It also stores encryption keys in a Trusted Platform Model (TPM) v1.2 chip. The entire system partition is encrypted-both the hibernation file and the user data. It also stores encryption keys in a Trusted Platform Model (TPM) v1.2 chip, if one is available on the PC."

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/reliability.mspx

[BSDFreak]

Looks at this, now they want to lock us out.

From the page: "Multi-tiered Data Protection

Advanced data protection technologies in Windows Vista reduce the risk that data on laptops or on other computers will be viewed by unauthorized people, even if the laptop is lost or stolen.

Windows Vista supports full-volume encryption to prevent disk access to files by other operating systems. It also stores encryption keys in a Trusted Platform Model (TPM) v1.2 chip. The entire system partition is encrypted-both the hibernation file and the user data. It also stores encryption keys in a Trusted Platform Model (TPM) v1.2 chip, if one is available on the PC."

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsvista/reliability.mspx

The way i understand it, it prevents access to files by other operating systems, that basically means that you can't get to your files from another operating system, it doesn't mean that vista cannot be started by a boot loader.

It also says that it supports it, not that it's impossible to turn it off (if it's on by default).

[Emerzen]

I agree w/ BSDFreak. MS is not "the dark side." MS is a for-profit company in a (in theory) free-market capitalist economy. there are good and bad aspects to this, as there are to everything in life. They are a very obviously successful at what they do, albeit by sometimes unfair means. But, the free market has never been for the feint of heart. If someone comes up w/ a better product AND a better means of selling it, they could take MS out but no-one has done that (probably because the OS business, per se, is not that profitable anymore).

As far as Vista goes w/ volume encryption, I think they are providing what their users want. It is frankly too easy to walk up to a computer, pop in a CD, fire up a (pick one) OS and have your way w/ the computer. And, as BSDFreak pointed out, it doesn't mean the owner will not be able to install a 2nd OS alongside Vista.

[prizrak]

I don't like the way MS conducts business. They do illegal things on a fairly regular basis, but at the same time I have no problem with their product. I can't even say that Windows sux anymore. It has ****** defaults but that's about it. I wouldn't worry about Vista all that much the system reqs are pretty nuts so it will take a while for it to get adopted. By the time it is widely used we gonna have some hacks ;)

[mstlyevil]

Microsoft would be foolish to lock out dual booting. There are too many legal ramifications for them to do so right now. Encrypting the file system so another OS cannot read files does not equate to not having the ability to dual boot. Besides, if you install Vista first and then your Linux distrobution, the Linux distro will rewrite the grub for you any how and allow to dual boot. People who claim MS is going to stop dual-booting are just speading anti-MS FUD.

[Hygelac]

I don't like the sounds of Vista's volume encryption. Why? I have an aging laptop that I needed to get on-line again recently. One of the first things I did was download an antivirus program because it was Win98. While I was doing so, I got a virus which wiped-out a bunch of the system files. As a result, I could only boot in safe-mode, and had no way to get the files off the computer (no network, floppy, etc). However, I was able to recover the files by running the Damn Small liveCD (which could run the floppy drive, allowing me to (very very slowly) remove the files). Had that computer's files been encrypted, I could not have done so, at least with such relative and legal ease (that is, if I understand this 'volume encrytion' correctly).
Now the laptop runs Ubuntu, internet and all! :mrgreen:
Maybe all the new TC features will keep Windows computers from ever getting viruses, making this a non-issue; but I doubt it. Having alternative ways of doing something (not just The Microsoft Way) is important; know what I mean?

[GreyFox503]

It seems to me that lots of people are interested in freedom when they want to use their computer. They dont want to be told what to do however people are still being restrained.

However look at Java ...
I wouldn't point to Java when discussing the virtues of free software, because it's not Free:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/java-trap.html

That said, I agree with most of what you said.


Microsoft would be foolish to lock out dual booting. There are too many legal ramifications for them to do so right now. Encrypting the file system so another OS cannot read files does not equate to not having the ability to dual boot. Besides, if you install Vista first and then your Linux distrobution, the Linux distro will rewrite the grub for you any how and allow to dual boot. People who claim MS is going to stop dual-booting are just speading anti-MS FUD.
mstlyevil is right on. Everything that's been said is about ENCRYPTING THE FILESYSTEM, not dual-booting. So stop making stuff up until either that's announced explicitly or until it's actually proven to be true. Otherwise it is just being overzealous and creating lies about MS.

Full volume encryption will make dual-booting a less attractive if other OS's cannot read from Vista's partitions, but it does not prevent dual booting.

I don't like Microsoft as much as the next guy, but I don't lie about what they do, either.

[BSDFreak]

I don't like the sounds of Vista's volume encryption. Why? I have an aging laptop that I needed to get on-line again recently. One of the first things I did was download an antivirus program because it was Win98. While I was doing so, I got a virus which wiped-out a bunch of the system files. As a result, I could only boot in safe-mode, and had no way to get the files off the computer (no network, floppy, etc). However, I was able to recover the files by running the Damn Small liveCD (which could run the floppy drive, allowing me to (very very slowly) remove the files). Had that computer's files been encrypted, I could not have done so, at least with such relative and legal ease (that is, if I understand this 'volume encrytion' correctly).
Now the laptop runs Ubuntu, internet and all! :mrgreen:
Maybe all the new TC features will keep Windows computers from ever getting viruses, making this a non-issue; but I doubt it. Having alternative ways of doing something (not just The Microsoft Way) is important; know what I mean?

I love the sound of it, MS is doing something very right with this.

The thing is, with the recovery tools available in vista coupled with everything else in it it's going to be a very resistant system, of course, nothing is impossible...

Well, except hacking a properly configured OpenBSD box of course. :D

[JimmyJazz]

preventing dual booting could be the needle that broke the camels back in the issue of MS being a monopoly in the courts. Hell I kinda hope they try.

[prizrak]

There is EFS (Encrypted File System) feature in NT (2K and XP I'm sure off, possibly 4) no one is yelling about that. If the encryption is up to the user then you are just fine, no one is making you encrypt your files. MS seems to be trying to compete the right way, by creating a stable and secure OS, nothing wrong with that. If encryption can't be turned off THEN there is a problem.

[GreyFox503]

If encryption can't be turned off THEN there is a problem.
Just because it's an option doesn't mean it's not a problem. Many do-it-yourselfers just choose the default options when installing Windows. Much more significant is the idea that millions of new Dells, HPs, and Gateways will all come with this encryption on by default.

For us that know about it and choose to dual-boot, we can get around it, but everyone will be using it without even knowing it...

[prizrak]

Just because it's an option doesn't mean it's not a problem. Many do-it-yourselfers just choose the default options when installing Windows. Much more significant is the idea that millions of new Dells, HPs, and Gateways will all come with this encryption on by default.

For us that know about it and choose to dual-boot, we can get around it, but everyone will be using it without even knowing it...
Those who will use it w/o knowing about it, will not bother to dual-boot. Ones who will care/know can turn it off :)

[BSDFreak]

Just because it's an option doesn't mean it's not a problem. Many do-it-yourselfers just choose the default options when installing Windows. Much more significant is the idea that millions of new Dells, HPs, and Gateways will all come with this encryption on by default.

For us that know about it and choose to dual-boot, we can get around it, but everyone will be using it without even knowing it...

It's what? Five clicks away to disable it?

Personally i wouldn't disable it if i were to dualboot, i'd keep it and do what i have always done, use a shared partition for shared files between the OS's.

As it IS it's a problem to share files between XP and Linux since you cannot write to NTFS in Linux and you can't access your Linux partition in XP, this is a trivial change for most people.

Remember that this does in NO way stop you from dualbooting.

[prizrak]

It's what? Five clicks away to disable it?

Personally i wouldn't disable it if i were to dualboot, i'd keep it and do what i have always done, use a shared partition for shared files between the OS's.

As it IS it's a problem to share files between XP and Linux since you cannot write to NTFS in Linux and you can't access your Linux partition in XP, this is a trivial change for most people.

Remember that this does in NO way stop you from dualbooting.

Actually there is a 3rd party program that allows Windows read/write access to EXT2 partitions. I do believe the latest version also works with EXT3 but I'm unsure. My favorite FS is Reiser and there is no driver for that AFAIK :(

[BSDFreak]

Actually there is a 3rd party program that allows Windows read/write access to EXT2 partitions. I do believe the latest version also works with EXT3 but I'm unsure. My favorite FS is Reiser and there is no driver for that AFAIK :(

Yeah, and there is Paragon for Linux, i know about them but they are basically hacks and i wouldn't trust them.

Still, having a partition with shared data is a solution i prefer if i can't use an off computer solution such as using a networked drive.

I prefer EXT3 personally but i'll never access it through windows.

[Adrian]

Actually there is a 3rd party program that allows Windows read/write access to EXT2 partitions. I do believe the latest version also works with EXT3 but I'm unsure. My favorite FS is Reiser and there is no driver for that AFAIK :(

I think you're talking about this:
http://www.fs-driver.org/

Since ext2 and ext3 are fully compatible, it can handle ext3 partitions as well.

I'm using this driver for a shared ext3 partition, and it works flawlessly.

[Mr. Electric Wizard]

I haven't had any issues reading/writing to ntfs using samba...
Should I not be able to do this?
:confused:

[Swab]

Someone on this forum mentioned Ghandi already. I don't remember the quote but basically in the end you win. MS has been doing everything in their power for years to keep people on Windows, yet many switch to Linux everyday. Firefox gained a double digit market share in a matter of months and that's despite the fact that most sites are optimized for IE.

It's something like:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

[prizrak]

It's something like:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
Yeah that's it

[DevilsAdvocate]

It's something like:

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

Think Tibet here!

[Swab]

Think Tibet here!

I don't get it..

[DevilsAdvocate]

I don't get it..

Think of Tibetan's happily nodding there head in agreement w/ the sentiment of the Ghandi quote prior to China rolling their tanks in there.

[BSDFreak]

I haven't had any issues reading/writing to ntfs using samba...
Should I not be able to do this?
:confused:

No, and you are not able to access the files of a different partition on the same drive dual booting into Linux.

[GreyFox503]

Those who will use it w/o knowing about it, will not bother to dual-boot. Ones who will care/know can turn it off :)
If your Windows installation goes south, you can kiss your data goodbye if none of your recovery CDs can read from its encrypted partition.



It's what? Five clicks away to disable it?
If it is, that would be better. I am under the impression that there would be no way to just turn off filesystem-wide encryption. Doing so would mean that your entire partition would have to be re-written. If so, that would take a while, but it would do the trick.

I think the way they are implementing this is that once an encrypted partition is created, it stays that way permanently. If you can change at will from one style to the other, that makes the situation significantly different. Though most users would not change anyways.



I haven't had any issues reading/writing to ntfs using samba...
Should I not be able to do this?
:confused:
That is just fine. If you use samba to write files over a network, then those computers are running Windows and use the NTFS filesystem. Your computer does not directly communicate with the remote computer's disks or filesystem. It just sends the data and then Windows on the other computer writes to its own filesystem.

What they are talking about is if an NTFS partition is actually mounted and being written to directly by a linux system, then it is unstable and risks corrupting data.

[MetalMusicAddict]

IPersonally i wouldn't disable it if i were to dualboot, i'd keep it and do what i have always done, use a shared partition for shared files between the OS's.

As it IS it's a problem to share files between XP and Linux since you cannot write to NTFS in Linux and you can't access your Linux partition in XP, this is a trivial change for most people.
This isnt exactly accurate. Most people here use EXT3 for their file system. Installing THIS (http://www.fs-driver.org/) driver in windows will let you read/write to a EXT2/3 drive in windows. Ive used it for 6 months now and so far its solid.

[BSDFreak]

If your Windows installation goes south, you can kiss your data goodbye if none of your recovery CDs can read from its encrypted partition.

That is complete and utter FUD ********, yeah, i write that in capital letters because that is the worst thing i know of, if you don't know **** about it, DON'T TALK ABOUT IT.



If it is, that would be better. I am under the impression that there would be no way to just turn off filesystem-wide encryption. Doing so would mean that your entire partition would have to be re-written. If so, that would take a while, but it would do the trick.

May i ask WHERE you got that impression from? Have you read ANYTHING about it or are you just making this up as you go along?


I think the way they are implementing this is that once an encrypted partition is created, it stays that way permanently. If you can change at will from one style to the other, that makes the situation significantly different. Though most users would not change anyways.

And if you weren't too lazy to read we woudln't even be discussing this.


That is just fine. If you use samba to write files over a network, then those computers are running Windows and use the NTFS filesystem. Your computer does not directly communicate with the remote computer's disks or filesystem. It just sends the data and then Windows on the other computer writes to its own filesystem.

What they are talking about is if an NTFS partition is actually mounted and being written to directly by a linux system, then it is unstable and risks corrupting data.


Or the other way around, hacks aren't that trustworthy, space is cheap, buy a NAS.

[BSDFreak]

This isnt exactly accurate. Most people here use EXT3 for their file system. Installing THIS (http://www.fs-driver.org/) driver in windows will let you read/write to a EXT2/3 drive in windows. Ive used it for 6 months now and so far its solid.

And it MAY work MOST of the time, it's a hack, it'll work until it doesn't work and all your precious data is long gone.

Do this, create a third partition, copy everything you want to share to that, that way, not only can you share it, you have a backup too if something should happen.

Or a NAS, fairly cheap and extremely portable.

[GreyFox503]

BSDFreak, you prompted me to read more about the volume encryption in Vista, and you're right, it's not as bad as I made it out to be.

There's a document on Microsoft's website about Longhorn/Vista's Secure Startup idea, the full volume encryption in question. It's here:

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/pcdesign/secure-start_tech.mspx

It's a little dry, but you need a TPM microcontroller to use this. It's hardware based. But, it looks like you can recover data from a Windows installation that won't boot by setting up a password or recovery disks ahead of time. It doesn't say, but I'd guess by using the Windows installation CD/Recovery console. Because of the TPM, I think that means you couldn't use a linux liveCD to recover it.

It looks like you can uninstall it too, by going to the Windows Security Center, which will either remove the TPM hardware reliance or just decrypt your entire partition.


BSDFreak, thanks for calling me on that. I really did think I had it right, but I had probably read sites that were too critical of it (like slashdot or digg), or drew wrong conclusions. I want to know what the truth is, and I had it wrong. If you have any more info to add I'd like it, too.

[BSDFreak]

BSDFreak, you prompted me to read more about the volume encryption in Vista, and you're right, it's not as bad as I made it out to be.

There's a document on Microsoft's website about Longhorn/Vista's Secure Startup idea, the full volume encryption in question. It's here:

http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/platform/pcdesign/secure-start_tech.mspx

It's a little dry, but you need a TPM microcontroller to use this. It's hardware based. But, it looks like you can recover data from a Windows installation that won't boot by setting up a password or recovery disks ahead of time. It doesn't say, but I'd guess by using the Windows installation CD/Recovery console. Because of the TPM, I think that means you couldn't use a linux liveCD to recover it.

It looks like you can uninstall it too, by going to the Windows Security Center, which will either remove the TPM hardware reliance or just decrypt your entire partition.


BSDFreak, thanks for calling me on that. I really did think I had it right, but I had probably read sites that were too critical of it (like slashdot or digg), or drew wrong conclusions. I want to know what the truth is, and I had it wrong. If you have any more info to add I'd like it, too.

It won't be disabled OR enabled by default, you will be presented with a choice to intall it, to use it as the security they are aiming for, this is the only way to do it.

Dual boot will be ok either way, partition tables are separate from MBR and the disc descript cannot be used encrypted sine most bioses do not suppurt heri action, this sound like Alpha security model to me, good luck though, that CPU is the BEST in the world but it's also dead.

you are a cool fox, just remember this, ask the question rather than make the statement.

Peace bro.

[M3ta7h3ad]

Not to mention Vista Volume Encryption will only work on PC's with TPM installed. You'll still only have E-NTFS to use on non-tpm computers.

Its no different really from using PGP to act as an encrypted volume/disk, just MSFT's own version.

And... I must say that its about the greatest idea ever! No longer need to worry about folks booting up knoppix STD, grabbing the sam's and running lophtcrack on them to gain access to the system. Its one of the best corporate security measures yet...aside from the fact that in a corporate environment, cases should be locked, bios entry disabled, and it should be set up to boot solely from a specific hard drive, it does stop data becoming vulnerable after a theft of machines however :)

MSFT isnt evil, your just misinformed.

[ubuntu27]

I think this is a Good read about Windows & Microsoft:

http://100777.com/node/1120


And this is the reason I use Linux: http://100777.com/node/1107 [I recommend you to read this ;) ]

[Bandit]

No, and you are not able to access the files of a different partition on the same drive dual booting into Linux.
Actualy you can and SuSE ships with the software to do it, but be warned it is still beta and has been known to kill a NTFS. ;)
Cheers,
Bandit

[prizrak]

I think this is a Good read about Windows & Microsoft:

http://100777.com/node/1120


And this is the reason I use Linux: http://100777.com/node/1107 [I recommend you to read this ;) ]
Very interesting article. However alot of things that are on by default have been turned off in SP2. Some of the things he says are impossible to turn off, I've turned off w/o much effort. Then again I suppose you don't know if it's REALLY off.....

[ninotob]

Windows Vista supports full-volume encryption to prevent disk access to files by other operating systems. It also stores encryption keys in a Trusted Platform Model (TPM) v1.2 chip. The entire system partition is encrypted-both the hibernation file and the user data. It also stores encryption keys in a Trusted Platform Model (TPM) v1.2 chip, if one is available on the PC."


OK, I'll play devil's advocate here (realize I don't run MS on any of my machines). This doesn't sound all that nefarious. Imagine you have a computer with sensitive data. Not NSA secrets, but name, address, DOB, and SS# in a database for your business. If you have this info, you worry about it leaking out.

So what's to prevent someone from stealing a HD, or even booting a live rescue CD from seeing the sensitive info? Nothing. The only hope is encryption. FWIW, OSX offers a similar feature and I have no doubt some paranoid linux/bsd also offers system wide encryption.

Anyway, if you must dual boot, and it really is impossible to have an unencrypted partion, use two drives.

[mstlyevil]

I have to agree with others here that suggest a third partition for shared data. Make sure you set it up as a FAT32 FS so both Vista and Linux/Ubuntu can write to it and read it with no problem. You can also do this with XP to make file sharing between partitions possible. I think when it comes to TPM and DRM many people read too much in to it. What was once planned for both of these has been scaled back just because of negative customer feedback. It is also my understanding that Gates was originally opposed to the idea of DRM in Windows, but that the entertainment industry threatend to make media unplayable on PC's if MSFT did not go along with it. Ultimately it is the customers that will determine how far they will let DRM and TPM go in their os.

[BSDFreak]

Actualy you can and SuSE ships with the software to do it, but be warned it is still beta and has been known to kill a NTFS. ;)
Cheers,
Bandit

We are discussing EFS here, AFAIK there is NO tool yet available (even paragon) that can acces EFS, not the version available in NT-XP and not in the version delivered with Vista either. The other tools have been discussed and Suse are downright stupid to enable native writing to NTFS as they do NOT advice you to run the fix after writing and you WILL lose data eventually without it.

Novell sacrifices security for functionality which is one of the resasons why they will end up where Corel ended up. Listening to Windows users who STILL won't change their primary OS isn't the way to go, sadly, the Gnome team listens to Novell too, way too much.

[BSDFreak]

I have to agree with others here that suggest a third partition for shared data. Make sure you set it up as a FAT32 FS so both Vista and Linux/Ubuntu can write to it and read it with no problem. You can also do this with XP to make file sharing between partitions possible. I think when it comes to TPM and DRM many people read too much in to it. What was once planned for both of these has been scaled back just because of negative customer feedback. It is also my understanding that Gates was originally opposed to the idea of DRM in Windows, but that the entertainment industry threatend to make media unplayable on PC's if MSFT did not go along with it. Ultimately it is the customers that will determine how far they will let DRM and TPM go in their os.

It will go the same way region coding went once region free players entered the market. It won't be illegal to sell a player that won't support it and in the end, even Sony will support those players or find themselves having a one figure market share.

Money talks.

[Jussi Kukkonen]

I think this is a Good read about Windows & Microsoft:

http://100777.com/node/1120


And this is the reason I use Linux: http://100777.com/node/1107

That guy knows how to rant.

The problem is, why should I listen to a guy who

says things like [I]the windows platform is ... patently, blatantly, and unashamedly insecure by design (and promises to back his statement).
in the following five pages only presents small bits of information that are vaguely related to the subject (I mean huffing and puffing about "errors per LOC"? come on...)

And no, I don't think Windows is a particularly secure platform. I just hate it when people pretend to be non-partisan or scientific when they clearly aren't...

[Mr. Electric Wizard]

That is just fine. If you use samba to write files over a network, then those computers are running Windows and use the NTFS filesystem. Your computer does not directly communicate with the remote computer's disks or filesystem. It just sends the data and then Windows on the other computer writes to its own filesystem.

What they are talking about is if an NTFS partition is actually mounted and being written to directly by a linux system, then it is unstable and risks corrupting data.


Whew! Thanks...:p