Is Spysweeper Retarded?

[bilbous]

Which, the one he claims I subscribe to or the one I accused him of subscribing to?

[neko kyouran]

oh good, glad to see this heat back up, my marshmellows were getting cold afterall.  these smores don't cook to well without the heat.

And back on somewhat of the topic of m$ versus "teh penguin",  I use microsoft.  I like linux, but I find it much easier to run windows for everything I need, and I don't have problems with windows lackluster security, simply becuase I don't click on that bonzai buddy pop up, to put it in simplest terms.  Sure I could do pretty much everything under linux, but I have been keeping up with it's developement for a few good years now, and I just don't see any major reason why I should switch.  Now, if m$ decided to stop support of xp, and I start to have problems doing things I need to do, then I will look to Linux as a sound option.  I haven't bought a windows os since 95, and that was becuase it came installed on the gateway pc.  All the other versions over the years have been through school.  I won't ever pay for something that isn't bug free and guranteed to work, so unless m$ decides to make Vista free, well, I'm sticking with xp until I'm forced to change becuase it can't do what I need it to do.

When you get down to it, the decision of which OS is better, is only your personal opinion.  That opinoin should be based on yourself getting familiar with both choices and determining which one is going to suit your needs the best.  This isn't too say that there aren't die hards on either side of the fense though.  

I use windows becuase it's what I am most familiar with, it's what I use all over the place at work (minus the *nix server machines we have), and after comparing the two, it suits my needs with the smallest amount of fuss involved.  Now as linux keeps growing and evolving over the next few years, that may change, and I may switch.

As I see it right now though, windows is more computer illiterate user friendly, and since that's the by far majority of computer users, thats why it will be popular.  Linux may be the better OS in terms of security and all that, but if the computer illiterate person can't just boot it up, and start clicking, then it won't ever become the standard workstation OS.  Windows caters to the general mass, the general mass just happens to be computer illiterate.  *nix caters to those with a bit more knowledge and assumes the user knows what they are doing for the most part.  Both OS cater towards a very different group of people.  Even though this is true, that doesn't neccessarily mean one is "teh l33test" over the other.

Oh, and macs are just for people who like pretty colors.  

[ramlambmoo]

Tell me then exactly what is it I am try to say the conspiracy is?

Did you know that MS has been backing SCO through a third party in their futile lawsuit against I suppose it is Novell now for their baseless claims that the Linux kernel contains SCO proprietary code. Sco has not offered one shred of proof and would have gone under long since if not for MS trying to protect their monopoly.

I think the greatest marketing ploy in history came from Debeers who convinced  generations of women that diamonds were valuable. They are not. They are about as common as amethyst. The only reason they are expensive is that Debeers stockpiles (picks number out of hat) 90% and only lets a trickle go to market.

It is true that there is not optimal support for all possible equipment but it is getting better, part of the reason for that is the unfair business practices of the Beast of Redmond.

...a word processor; neither, I think, do most people, however their expectations have been trained to require one. How did the business world get along before there were computers and only manual typewriters or before that? Why is it that I have to use a Microsoft proprietary format to send someone a resume?

I am sure they will happily take your money while they take away your privacy and rights.

You said that MS has been backing SCO in order to propogate a lawsuit against linux.  You have not provided any evidence of this actually happening.
You think that diamonds are as common as amethysts and that De Beers has stockpiled 90% of the world's diamonds and is only selling a few (Despite the fact that De Beers only sells 60% of the world diamonds on the market- wikipedia).
You think that business practices from Microsoft are to blame for poor hardware support in linux, but gave no evidence.
You think that Businesses would be fine without word processors and that word processors are an unecessary software that pretty much the entire world has been tricked into buying over and over.
You think that microsoft is taking away privacy and rights.

None of the claims you have made have been backed up by facts.  That is why I call it a 'conspiracy theory'.  Microsoft conspiring with SCO, De Beers conspiring to keep Diamonds under their control, Microsoft conspiring with Hardware manufactors, etc.

[bilbous]

You said that MS has been backing SCO in order to propogate a lawsuit against linux.  You have not provided any evidence of this actually happening.

Well if it was good enough to put in front of the Judge who are you to say it was not evidence?

You think that diamonds are as common as amethysts and that De Beers has stockpiled 90% of the world's diamonds and is only selling a few (Despite the fact that De Beers only sells 60% of the world diamonds on the market- wikipedia).

De Beers was founded on 13 March 1888 -wikipedia, that 60%? excludes Canada and Russia looks like it might be out of date
http://www.debeerscanada.com/  and was a relatively recent occurance.

You think that business practices from Microsoft are to blame for poor hardware support in linux, but gave no evidence.

If I see a man in a bank with a mask and a gun I am not going to conclude he is trick or treating, I gave you a specific instance of a prior Microsoft bad act (DOS 6 anyone?) you claimed it was irrelevant and off-topic.

You think that Businesses would be fine without word processors and that word processors are an unecessary software that pretty much the entire world has been tricked into buying over and over.
You think that microsoft is taking away privacy and rights.

Word Processors today are extremely bloated with plenty of features few people need included just to keep the price high and to ensure customers have to keep buying updates. What feature of the most recent update could you not do without?

None of the claims you have made have been backed up by facts.  That is why I call it a 'conspiracy theory'.  Microsoft conspiring with SCO, De Beers conspiring to keep Diamonds under their control, Microsoft conspiring with Hardware manufactors, etc.

And yet you have presented no facts which counter any of my arguments instead relying on labelling them derisively.

You claim Windows is easy to use, where is your evidence for that? Would it be the thousands of computers that have been compromised and turned into zombies? If that is a proper function of an easy to use computer I'll eat my hat. If it isn't a proper function then perhaps it is not quite so easy.

It is no more difficult to use a properly set up Linux box or Mac than it is to use a properly set up Windows box, you point and you click, maybe once maybe twice. Then you type or you point and click some more. The main difference is that the Linux box or Mac is more likely to be set up properly in the first place.

You claim that it is not vulnerabilities that matter but that it is known vulnerabilities but you fail to specify who it is that knows what. If MS knows about a vulnerability but doesn't tell anyone or claims it isn't a bug its a feature is it "known"? If security researcher "A" knows about it but doesn't tell anyone is it "known"? If Cracker group "B" knows about it but tells no-one but uses it to steal your data is it "known"? If "A" and "B" are actively searching for it for their own purposes in what way does it not matter it will be found.

BTW Selling data-mined information has become big business. Why wouldn't Unethical Megacorp want to get in on the action?

BTW² I really loved your discription of Windows as for really stupid people which you imply is the majority of the population.

Thats because intelligent people are attracted to linux.  If the 90% of windows users started using linux, they wouldnt magically grow some intelligence, and they'd still click that bonzai buddy.  Linux is blessed with a (relatively) intelligent user base.  That doesnt mean windows is crap software, it means that alot of the users are stupid.

Im not sure how many normal windows users (read: 90+% of the modern western population) could handle properly managing permissions.

[zanzibar]

Well if it was good enough to put in front of the Judge who are you to say it was not evidence?

People put a lot of things infront of judges.  What matters is if the judge throws it out or not.

If I see a man in a bank with a mask and a gun I am not going to conclude he is trick or treating, I gave you a specific instance of a prior Microsoft bad act (DOS 6 anyone?) you claimed it was irrelevant and off-topic.

I don't think this answers the question.

Word Processors today are extremely bloated with plenty of features few people need included just to keep the price high and to ensure customers have to keep buying updates.

Again, this doesn't answer the question.  Also, it's pretty much mere assertion - there are plenty of other reasons why word processors have had more features added to them over time.  You're reaching on this one.

And yet you have presented no facts which counter any of my arguments instead relying on labelling them derisively.

He who claims must prove his claims.

Thats because intelligent people are attracted to linux..

Ok, this is a definate troll comment.

[sylmael]

Hey Bilbous, I just wanted to say I support totally you on this one, and I think you're losing your time talking to sheeps that just don't even know what Linux looks like ...  Anyway, great arguments Bilbous !

[zanzibar]

Hey Bilbous, I just wanted to say I support totally you on this one, and I think you're losing your time talking to sheeps that just don't even know what Linux looks like ...  Anyway, great arguments Bilbous !

Hey!  Linux is great, but Bilbous's comment was just trolling!  Don't think for a second that I don't have appreciation for Linux!

[ramlambmoo]

Well if it was good enough to put in front of the Judge who are you to say it was not evidence?

Literally anything can be put forward to a Judge.  But it was not proven, therefore it is not a fact.  That’s what matters.

De Beers was founded on 13 March 1888 -wikipedia, that 60%? excludes Canada and Russia looks like it might be out of date
http://www.debeerscanada.com/  and was a relatively recent occurance.

Could you point to any specific page on De Beers that answers the question of what % of the Diamond trade they control?
It says nowhere that the 60% excludes Canada and Russia, and if it did, the percentage would be even lower, because there are many mines outside their traditional mining sites.  In fact further in the article it says their share today is probably an even lower 50% or less. 
STILL I don’t see what De Beers has to do with anything at all.  Its all good and nice and interesting to discuss, but it has absolutely no relevance, unless you'd like to enlighten us.

If I see a man in a bank with a mask and a gun I am not going to conclude he is trick or treating, I gave you a specific instance of a prior Microsoft bad act (DOS 6 anyone?) you claimed it was irrelevant and off-topic.

I didn't ask for a "Microsoft Bad Act", I asked for specific proof of your claim that "business practices from Microsoft are to blame for poor hardware support in linux".  DOS has nothing to do with Hardware support in Linux, unless there’s a connection here none of us are seeing.

Word Processors today are extremely bloated with plenty of features few people need included just to keep the price high and to ensure customers have to keep buying updates. What feature of the most recent update could you not do without?

Hang on, first you said we didn’t need word processors at all, now you're saying we don’t necessarily need the latest ones.  Make your mind up about what you're arguing.  I couldn’t live without Mail merge, compatibility with excel, full support for different label sizes, VBA support (with editor), Autosave functions, Outlining views, Document changes tracking.  I don’t use the very latest version of word because I dont know of any critical features I'd need- but I'm sure if I checked it out I would find features that improved by productivity.  Before I took an actual course in word I thought I knew everything about it; then I was actually forced to use some more advanced features and found I could do things alot faster and more accurately.
Speaking of which, do you work in an office environment?  Are you responsible for organising document distribution and conducting mail outs to clients?  How exactly would you have complete knowledge of other people's needs enough to say that these features are just 'bloat'?  You're displaying your narrow minded view again.

And yet you have presented no facts which counter any of my arguments instead relying on labelling them derisively.

On the contrary; I read and quoted from the SCO link you provided, I gave quotes of facts from wikipedia relating to the De Beers diamond trade, to name a few.  Most of the time I don’t bother countering your arguments because they're not relevant at all!  I don’t care about the De Beers diamond trade or DOS 6.0 unless you can tell me how they relate to the issue at hand, which is windows ease of use for ordinary users.  You're just clutching at straws and going off on tangents every time I try and steer the topic back to what we were originally arguing about!
"Oh, linux sucks!?  Well De Beers has a Diamond monopoly! Yeah! What do you say to that, huh? Windows?  What about word processors, we don’t need them at aaaaall, man...."

You claim Windows is easy to use, where is your evidence for that? Would it be the thousands of computers that have been compromised and turned into zombies? If that is a proper function of an easy to use computer I'll eat my hat. If it isn't a proper function then perhaps it is not quite so easy.

The fact that windows has 90% of the market share.  You and I no doubt agree that Linux is technically superior, so what then is the reason why Windows is many many times more popular?  I don’t think, in all of the business fields something as technical as computing, you can dominate ninety percent of the market without having a decent product.

It is no more difficult to use a properly set up Linux box or Mac than it is to use a properly set up Windows box, you point and you click, maybe once maybe twice. Then you type or you point and click some more. The main difference is that the Linux box or Mac is more likely to be set up properly in the first place.

You just accuse me of making unfounded claims about ease of use, then you go and make on yourself.  What brand of Linux can be installed and setup in two clicks?  Give me a link?

You claim that it is not vulnerabilities that matter but that it is known vulnerabilities but you fail to specify who it is that knows what. If MS knows about a vulnerability but doesn't tell anyone or claims it isn't a bug its a feature is it "known"? If security researcher "A" knows about it but doesn't tell anyone is it "known"? If Cracker group "B" knows about it but tells no-one but uses it to steal your data is it "known"? If "A" and "B" are actively searching for it for their own purposes in what way does it not matter it will be found.

I honestly don’t even know what you're trying to say, or what your purpose in saying it is.  I mentioned there is a correlation between number of users and number of known security bugs.  If you disagree with that, say so.   Suffice to say, I know Window's security isnt the best, but its decent, and a professional can easily secure a windows box against viruses and spyware.

BTW Selling data-mined information has become big business. Why wouldn't Unethical Megacorp want to get in on the action?

Because its illegeal, because it would be hard to hide, because they have an ethical duty not to?? Thats like saying "Terroism is big these days, so why wouldnt those arabs over there want to get in on the action"?  If you have any actual proof of Microsoft doing anything of the sort, feel free to present it. 

BTW2 I really loved your discription of Windows as for really stupid people which you imply is the majority of the population.

Again, making stuff up?  Can you please quote where I said that?

Hey Bilbous, I just wanted to say I support totally you on this one, and I think you're losing your time talking to sheeps that just don't even know what Linux looks like ...  Anyway, great arguments Bilbous !

Aside from the fact I've used Red Hat, Fedora, Gentoo, Suse, ArcLinux, Mandrake, Debian and Ubuntu along with Windows 95, 98, XP, XP 64-bit and Vista RC1, I'd clearly not know anything about this subject, would I.  Oh, and the plural of sheep is sheep, not sheeps, in case you would like to advance your english a bit.  Anyway, great arguments mate.

[Karyuu]

Let's avoid taking too aggressive or personal of a stance in this thread - there are plenty of bigger things to worry about anyway ;) Like saving whales. Try taking a step back, and if you have specific points to bring up, do so calmly - ultimately you're here to discuss issues, and not jab at each others' possible blunders and oversights. Corrections can be made in a way that progresses a topic instead of digging a rut for it.

So please cool your heads a bit.

[Monketh]

The problem inherent in Windows is exactly that it is catered to a group of users who refuse/can't take the effort to learn "computers."

I could also do pretty much everything I want in Win*, I just have become taken in by a number of features that I can't give up.  The solution's pretty obvious, though.  For lightweight apps, virtualize (VMware server is free.); for heavyweight apps, dual-boot.  I spend most of my computer-time in linux.  (Kubuntu specifically.)  Once you tweak your configuration and make it your own, it is much more efficient.  (I'm also addicted to KDE, which is not properly supported on Windows.  In other words, the killer app effect that keeps most people on Windows keeps me on linux.

[ramlambmoo]

The problem inherent in Windows is exactly that it is catered to a group of users who refuse/can't take the effort to learn "computers."

Touche, the problem with linux is that is is catered to a group of users who have a very high level of expertise in computing.  In it's current incarnation its simple not suitable for the general user base without it having been configured by someone else.  Which I think is definatly a shame, given it's potential.

I could also do pretty much everything I want in Win*, I just have become taken in by a number of features that I can't give up.  The solution's pretty obvious, though.  For lightweight apps, virtualize (VMware server is free.); for heavyweight apps, dual-boot.  I spend most of my computer-time in linux.  (Kubuntu specifically.)  Once you tweak your configuration and make it your own, it is much more efficient.  (I'm also addicted to KDE, which is not properly supported on Windows.  In other words, the killer app effect that keeps most people on Windows keeps me on linux.

What features of KDE cant you give up?  Not to be dismissive, I'm just interested to see what 'killer app' it has, so to speak.  I'd be suprised if it couldnt be done in windows, but of course I dont yet know what these features are.

Personally I dont think I could ever give up windows as my main O/S because of the amount of windows related programming and gaming I do.  For performance issues I cant really virtualize, and since I program while doing other basic things (like surfing the net, chatting to people, etc) the platform I use for programming dictates what platform I use for everything.

[Gharan]

So is Linux better than Windows or does it depend what you use your PC for ive often thought about changing to Linux would it be better for my music programs such as Cubase or would that aspect be the same?

[bilbous]

Well if it was good enough to put in front of the Judge who are you to say it was not evidence?

People put a lot of things infront of judges.  What matters is if the judge throws it out or not.

What is put before a judge is evidence until the judge says it isn't. Even if it is deemed inadmissable on a technicality it is still evidence.

If I see a man in a bank with a mask and a gun I am not going to conclude he is trick or treating, I gave you a specific instance of a prior Microsoft bad act (DOS 6 anyone?) you claimed it was irrelevant and off-topic.

I don't think this answers the question.

It is an analogy. It means that the best predictor of future actions is past actions. To spell it out for you because Microsoft has in the past used illegal and/or unethical means to achieve their ends there is no reason to doubt that they will again. Does not the U.S. have three strike laws for just this reason? I have no need to prove anything, this is a discussion not a court of law.

Word Processors today are extremely bloated with plenty of features few people need included just to keep the price high and to ensure customers have to keep buying updates.

Again, this doesn't answer the question.  Also, it's pretty much mere assertion - there are plenty of other reasons why word processors have had more features added to them over time.  You're reaching on this one.

I'm sorry, which question? Try to be specific and help me to help you understand.

And yet you have presented no facts which counter any of my arguments instead relying on labelling them derisively.

He who claims must prove his claims.

Ok Ram claims that Windows is better than Linux. Let's see him have a go at proving that.

Thats because intelligent people are attracted to linux..

Ok, this is a definate troll comment.

As you can see I have modified the post you are quoting and that comment was made by ramlambmoo. I just quoted it. Are you sure I'm the troll? I admit my inventive reading of his comments were meant for their entertainment value. It felt good to hoist him on his own petard.

Now Ram...

Well if it was good enough to put in front of the Judge who are you to say it was not evidence?

Literally anything can be put forward to a Judge.  But it was not proven, therefore it is not a fact.  That’s what matters.

You didn't ask for facts you asked for evidence. For the moment at least what I refered to is in front of a judge and as such is evidence.

Could you point to any specific page on De Beers that answers the question of what % of the Diamond trade they control?
It says nowhere that the 60% excludes Canada and Russia, and if it did, the percentage would be even lower, because there are many mines outside their traditional mining sites.  In fact further in the article it says their share today is probably an even lower 50% or less. 

You think that diamonds are as common as amethysts and that De Beers has stockpiled 90% of the world's diamonds and is only selling a few (Despite the fact that De Beers only sells 60% of the world diamonds on the market- wikipedia).

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debeers

The De Beers Group is a Johannesburg-based diamond mining and trading corporation. In the 1980's the firm had a near de facto monopoly on the world's diamond trade (80% share), however that share has been reduced to 60%[1] due to discoveries outside of De Beers' control (such as in Russia and Canada).

I posted the link to debeerscanada to show that they have their fingers in the Canadian pie now, as evidence that the wikipedia entry you refered to was indeed as I said out of date. Would you like me to go into wikipedia and update it?

You think that Businesses would be fine without word processors and that word processors are an unecessary software that pretty much the entire world has been tricked into buying over and over.

I said:

I have no real need for a word processor; neither, I think, do most people, however their expectations have been trained to require one. How did the business world get along before there were computers and only manual typewriters or before that?

Please try not to put words in my mouth.

Let's avoid taking too aggressive or personal of a stance in this thread - there are plenty of bigger things to worry about anyway Like saving whales. Try taking a step back, and if you have specific points to bring up, do so calmly - ultimately you're here to discuss issues, and not jab at each others' possible blunders and oversights. Corrections can be made in a way that progresses a topic instead of digging a rut for it.

So please cool your heads a bit.

I hope I have been calm and reasonable enough in my reply.

So is Linux better than Windows or does it depend what you use your PC for ive often thought about changing to Linux would it be better for my music programs such as Cubase or would that aspect be the same?

It really depends on what you use your computer for. I dual boot going into Windows for games that don't have Linux clients. There is software available to run Windows programs in Linux, Wine and it has a couple of for profit spinoffs, Cedega for running Windows games and another one I can't remember the name of for running office apps. I have not experimented with these but they exist. There are a large number of music programs available and even a couple of distributions that are tailored specifically for audio development. Do a search on distrowatch.com. I believe there is one or two livecd based distros which can be used purely be booting from the cd, no need to install anything. I have no experience with this specific type of livecd but I have had very little trouble with generic livecds. I would recommend that anyone who was interested in Linux but did not want to install anything should download a livecd and try it that way. One I have used in the past is called Knoppix. I haven't seen a recent version but it was the original that taught others how to do it.

[zanzibar]

What is put before a judge is evidence until the judge says it isn't. Even if it is deemed inadmissable on a technicality it is still evidence.

A technicality like being FALSE?

Genius.  Yet another "tactic" - every time you get caught, you will reinterpret your previous statements to mean something other than what they obviously meant originally.

[ramlambmoo]

Ok Ram claims that Windows is better than Linux. Let's see him have a go at proving that.

No, I didn’t claim that at all, and I wont.  "Better" is too subjective and you'd have to clearly define it before I would say that.  I said windows is easier to use and more aptly suited to general users, and my evidence for that is the fact windows has a 90% share of the operating system market.

What is put before a judge is evidence until the judge says it isn't. Even if it is deemed inadmissable on a technicality it is still evidence.

I asked for evidence that is taken as fact.  What you gave about the SCO case wasn’t dismissed on a technicality, it was never proven.  If it wasn’t proven, then it isnt fact.  You're side stepping the issue by playing on the wording here.  What I mean is, I want verifiable facts to back up your claims.

I have no need to prove anything, this is a discussion not a court of law.

No, you don’t have to prove anything, but you don’t have a very convincing argument by just making assertions without backing it up with facts.  Anyone can make claims, but a coherent discussion needs those claims to be backed up with actual facts.  If no one has to back up claims with facts then anyone can claim anything they like, and theres no discussion at all.

You didn't ask for facts you asked for evidence. For the moment at least what I refered to is in front of a judge and as such is evidence.

Evidence: (n.) "A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment".  I am asking you to provide facts, to validate your claims.  As we don’t have the means to determine whether the SCO claims are facts, we must rely on the courts where this was given as evidence: and if those courts have not verified them as true, then they should not be presented here as being true.

So, let me rephrase: do you have any verified facts to back up your claims?  

How did the business world get along before there were computers and only manual typewriters or before that?

Please try not to put words in my mouth.

You asked a rhetorical question about how businesses got along before computers; the implication was that businesses were and are fine without them.  If that's not what you meant, then you should have been clear and specific.  If you're not clear about the point you're trying to make, I’m going to have to interpret your post as best I can.

If its not what you meant, then what did you mean by that comment and what are you trying to prove by it?
If you did indeed mean that, then my response stands as is.  

I posted the link to debeerscanada to show that they have their fingers in the Canadian pie now, as evidence that the wikipedia entry you refered to was indeed as I said out of date. Would you like me to go into wikipedia and update it?

Thanks for the clarification- you should have said that when you posted it, imo.  However the article is not out of date as it mentions Canada in the next paragraph- "Currently, De Beers is involved in a joint venture that is developing a diamond prospect in Canada."  From the website you provided, "In Canada, De Beers has two advanced projects, which are scheduled to begin production at the end of 2007".  Therefore De Beers is not currently producing diamonds in Canada, and the wikipedia article is correct in both its assertions.  So please, no, don’t go and update it.