From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Dec 17 9:47:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from freebie.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-101-2-1-14.abo.wanadoo.fr [193.251.59.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9358B37B41A for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 09:47:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from contactdish ([10.0.0.10]) by freebie.atkielski.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id fBHHkuR16838; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:46:57 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from anthony@freebie.atkielski.com) Message-ID: <005a01c18722$d2d5a860$0a00000a@atkielski.com> From: "Anthony Atkielski" To: "Terry Lambert" Cc: "f.johan.beisser" , "FreeBSD Chat" References: <20011216112759.U16958-100000@localhost> <002f01c1866e$1e4d9510$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C1DB7EB.9232204A@mindspring.com> <001101c186dd$5ab94430$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C1DCDAC.CEA3DEAF@mindspring.com> <003301c186eb$bf1e8710$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <3C1DE3EB.8AB3C4E0@mindspring.com> Subject: Re: UNIX on the Desktop (was: Re: Why no Indians and Arabs?) Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 18:46:56 +0100 Organization: Anthony's Home Page (development site) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry writes: > Credentials are incredibly useful for keeping > single users from being able to aim guns at > their feet, without extraordinary effort. Both cannot simultaneously exist. To have multiple credentials, you must have multiple user identities, and this requires multiuser awareness. If a single user does not have access to all credentials on a system, it is a multiuser system. > I would argue that the inability to delete > the active Windows swap file is a locking > issue on the order of credential based locking, > since both control ability of the user to > manipulate a resource, and which resources > are regarded as system vs. user. The swap file cannot be deleted because it is in use (at least on my NT system); there are no credentials that permit you to delete files that are in use, just as there are no credentials that allow you to write outside the bounds of a file. > No, it requires more effort to turn it off. Only if it is on by default, but no system is initially configured with diminished credentials, since it would be impossible to modify or maintain it if it were. > Have you tried browsing to your C:\windows\system > directory in Explorer lately? There is no such directory on my machine. > You have to explicitly OK the navigation, as > these are protected directories. That is a protection applied to all users, not one based on credentials. > Since users of the OS out number programmers > 100,000 to 1, then if something would save 1 > hour of user time on average, it's worth > 100,000 programmer hours to make happen. If only Java programmers could understand that. > It's like the Steve Jobs argument about cutting > 30 seconds off the Macintosh boot time: sell > 1,000,000 machines, and for evey 30 seconds > you cut off the boot time, you've saved an > entire human life. That's the sort of reasoning I'd expect from Steve Jobs. If I follow the same reasoning, then every time a Mac crashes, three dozen people are killed. > You are not representative of someone qualified > to judge whether or not I am representative. No special qualifications are required, only the ability to distinguish differences. > I felt compelled because you were obvious > ignoring it. No, you explained it in the hope that you would be able to damage my credibility by creating the impression that you know more than I do about the topic. You've done that a number of times, with myself and with many others with whom you hold discussions, so it is easy to spot. > It's nice to know from your response that it > wasn't ignorance, but the inconvenince of the > facts to your argument, which caused that > omission. Those facts were not relevant to my argument. > You are not representative. Actually I am, much more so than most geeks. In part this is because I actually use my computer for productive work that has nothing to do with IT. > It's only painful when doing things at an > enterprise level. You did not initially apply any qualifications to your statement. > If you are going to delete text and replace > it with an ellipsis, at least make it clear that > that is what you are doing, by placing > the ellipsis in brackets, OK. Thanks. I follow CMS rules, rather than MLA rules, for the use of ellipses, mainly for the sake of brevity. > Your opinion, of course. With respect to the sacred mission, yes. However, with respect to modification of the OS, no. And I expect that the separation will only become greater over time. > Almost without exception, companies which have > remained in any market and active have sold > up market as their products matured, in order > to maintain both their profit margin, and their > rate of increase. One glaring exception being, of course, Apple. > There are several other books which show the > disasterous effects on comapnies unwilling to > change their margin and/or profit model ... One good example is Apple. > Frankly, Microsoft has leveraged its monopoly > position on the desktop ... in order to force > what is probably premature entry into the server > market on its part ... If its entry is premature, it will fail in its efforts. I don't think that Microsoft knows enough about the server market to really succeed within it, but if it can find customers that are at least as naïve as it is--and that is certainly possible with the continuing expansion of the server market--it may be able to sell lots of servers, anyway. > Eventually, I expect that Microsoft will spin= > off or simply "decide to abandon" the desktop > market. Not any time in the foreseeable future. Virtually all the revenue of Microsoft comes from the desktop. Additionally, Microsoft has consistently demonstrated that it only really understands desktops, not servers. Revenue growth would have to come more from the server sector, since Microsoft has locked up the desktop OS domain and hasn't produced any killer apps in years, but that doesn't mean that Microsoft will succeed in this. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message