What is Digg?14 Comments
- libervisco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+77of7, so here's a question at hand: Can DRM in Windows Vista obstruct the user experience by presenting an inconvenience or not? If the answer is yes then what I said is not FUD, but fact. If the answer is no then feel free to digg me down and bury this story.
Satisfied?
Thanks - freezombie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I wonder - have you read the article ?
FUD is a strategy to use as a last resort - does GNU/Linux need that ? That Ballmer spreads FUD about GNU/Linux shows that MS is desperate. Are we ? - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+47of7 has been hanging in this section only to provoke recently. His/her statements are invalid as well.
- Philluminati, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3
I won't shy away from the issue. If I think Unix and Linux are more appropriate OS's for a given scenario then I will say.
With ***** Ballmer speading FUD about Linux I don't see why we should be silenced. - ElectricSoup, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2From the article:
"... tell people to go ahead and try both (because both will require a leap to buy/download and install, though getting GNU/Linux is way easier and cheaper) and then see for themselves what exactly will just work for them."
Well, you're onto a hiding to nothing there. Do that, and you're quite likely to find out what *doesn't* work.
Your fondly imagined scenario of a dual-boot system might be off the agenda, because of a buggy installer:
missing or corrupt system32hal.dll.
Or maybe you'll find your wireless card isn't supported.
And then there's the multimedia problem--see esr's comments here:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/world-domination/world-domination-201.html
I appreciate libervisco's sentiments: he's basically saying, "Don't tell lies." For that's what FUD is: lies. But as a corollary to that he's adding, "Because Linux can stand on its own feet." But that's more doubtful. One doesn't tell lies, because one cares about the truth, not for any other reason. Besides, Linux can't, unfortunately, stand on its own feet that well -- or, rather, it can for some purposes, but not for all purposes. Read what Raymond says.
When you come down to it Windows Content Protection is an abominable thing, but it remains a somewhat theoretical problem known only to the highly technically informed unless and until it causes ordinary people real problems. But Linux can cause ordinary people real problems pretty quick (even if it doesn't always).
libervisco is quite wrong. Linux doesn't need to be tried and judged on its merits on some (non-existent) level playing field. Rather, what it needs is to be easily available pre-installed on hardware that's open and known inside out, so that no nasty surprises are waiting. (And that's difficult when Microsoft has the OEMs by the balls.)
Linux also needs to sort out the multimedia issues that Eric Raymond points to. That will be increasingly important: people want to play MP3s; people want to watch their DVDs. And they don't want to go through hell to add that functionalty -- that's all there out of the box on other OSes. - freezombie, on 10/12/2007, -2/+47of7, I'm NOT digging you down because doing that would support your theory. Can you deny that Vista supports DRM technologies to a greater extent than any other OS on this planet ? Think HDTV. Think iTunes — I know that these are bad examples for Vista-specific problems, but I hope you get the point.
Without saying that MS is closer to DRM than Apple, Vista must have most DRM support because MS had the greatest chance to implement it — people expect Vista to change and break compatibility, which, AFAIK, has not been true for an Apple product since the original X. - estvir, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Replace 7of7 with schestowitz in my previous post. :#
- libervisco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're right. What I was referring to is more the direction which GNU/Linux is taking, which is a system that "just works" even with multimedia support (which will be influenced by that WD201 article) than what may be the exact state of things today. The thing is that compared to the restrictions that DRM means for Vista user, the freedom in GNU/Linux well makes up for the other annoyances which are in the process of being fixed anyway.
After a user tries both he basically has a choice between a system that is deliberately restricting them and a system which currently annoys, but does so less and less as it continues to evolve. For the former the user knows the system wont improve (because as far as MS is concerned DRM seems to be here to stay) while for the latter the user ought to be aware that things are going towards the "just works" state.
But you're still right. I should have rephrased it like this. It is also true that, when it comes down to mass adoption, pre-installing on PCs is what will have to do it, but this article isn't so much about that as is about arguing that the FUD is not necessary for GNU/Linux to thrive among users who dare to choose for themselves. - estvir, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17of7, don't you dare attack someone for hanging around in sections to provoke, you do that for EVERY Microsoft story, positive and negative ones alike.
Most of your statements are invalid too, buddy. - MikeyisaFag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If you ask me, the battle between Vista and Linux seems to be way more brutal between the sides than OS X and Vista. I don't really see the point personally, use what operating system you love and ***** the rest. I don't try to forcefeed people my love of OS X, but if they ask why I have 2 Macs, I'll surely tell them.
If anything, running a somewhat niche operating system is a total benefit. The reason Windows is so unsafe is because of the install base, if we keep our numbers few, then malware creators wont have a reason to target us. Keep it a secret. :) - geoken, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm pretty sure the "let them use Vista and see the DRM restrictions it poses" plan is going to backfire. All the comments about Vista and DRM are usually split between the people who've never used it talking about how restrictive it is and the people who have/are using it talking about how it's non-existent and if it is there they've never noticed it. I sure as hell never noticed it, unless watching HD-DVD's that were downloaded of torrent sites using a copy of Vista downloaded of torrent sites is one of the usage scenerios microsoft considers acceptable.
- llbbl, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Msft spends a F-ton on advertising and I am sure that many brainwashed Corp execs will upgrade to Vista because they dont know any different. The truth is, Vista sucks. Msft should have open sourced it and charged for support. They have enough money and they OWE us for the crappy software they released in the past.
- utcursch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2@7of7: Don't spread FUD about FOSS!
- 7of7, on 10/12/2007, -10/+7Funny, since the writer doesn't even make it a paragraph in before saying DRM which is the biggest FUD about Vista. Anyone who has used Vista knows DRM is not an issue in the least, but that doesn't stop FOSS people from spreading FUD about it. I guess when you don't have a product that stands for itself you have to attack other products.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is