Frank Aronson wrote: > This will quickly be labeled off-topic, but I have to ask, why does > every Mac vs. PC thread always devolve into a Microsoft mugging? > Quite frankly, it belies a lack of objectivity (would you blame OOo's > presentation manager if that were the predominant presentation tool on > the market, for instance?). I have seen quite a number of problems > with Macs and other Apple products over the years that seem to be > thoroughly ignored. I am hardly an apologist for Microsoft, having > been a harsh critic for many years. But, to borrow from a recent > column regarding Windows 7 and Mac OS X Snow Leopard, I am an OS > agnostic. I believe that both systems (or for that matter, the many > flavors of Linux) have their pluses and minuses and I happily (and > sometimes unhappily - Windows Vista quickly comes to mind) work in > both worlds (not so much Linux. Sorry Linux guys!). > > As for the thumping that PowerPoint is getting in this thread, I > believe it to be a bit disingenuous. I have railed at the misuse of > PowerPoint for years. However, that criticism is not geared toward > the software itself, but to those who misuse the software. It's kind > of like blaming the hammer and nail for bad construction. It's not > the tool, but the person wielding the tool who is ultimately at fault. > PowerPoint can be a useful tool when used appropriately. I won't go into details. Too many threads on too many forums over too many years. I've worked on mainframes, "mini's", the original PC, the original Mac, networked Mac environments, networked PC environments with Novell as the hub, networked PC environments with Windows NT as the hub, and networked Mac & PC & Linux environments with Unix as the hub. I've been an MIS Manager, a Network Manager, a Unix Sysadmin, and programmed on Macs, PCs and Unix. With all that as background, it is my considered opinion that Microsoft deserves every bit of drubbing they are given and more. From a business and a software standards perspective, they have hacked away at everyone else who even gives the least appearance of competing with them. They show no mercy, and they deserve no mercy. If Bush had not taken the Presidency in 2000, Microsoft would have been broken up. The Bush Justice Department summarily dropped the case against Microsoft that had been in the courts and working toward resolution for years. Microsoft's marketing clout is such that when they wanted to torpedo Novell's directory services all they had to do was announce that they were going to develop Active Directory. They didn't even have it yet. But they succeeded in torpedoing what was at that time a superior product. Their Active Directory has perverted the LDAP standards so that other products don't work with AD unless they adapt them specifically to AD, and then they don't work with standards based products. It's a Microsoft standard dirty trick for dominating a market. The large scale bot attacks that our servers periodically experience and the onslaught of spam mail that threatens to clog everyone's mail servers are both perpetrated by people manipulating mostly Windows PCs that have been compromised by viruses that deliver back door control systems. In the past month or two I've had to block around 3000 individual IP addresses that were attacking my servers, unbeknownst to their owners. Watching the security alert services turns up many times more exploits against Windows than against other systems. Anyway, I said I wasn't going to go into detail. So I'll refrain from writing a treatise to document what I've seen over time. -- --------------- Chris Hoogendyk - O__ ---- Systems Administrator c/ /'_ --- Biology & Geology Departments (*) \(*) -- 140 Morrill Science Center ~~~~~~~~~~ - University of Massachusetts, Amherst <hoogendyk at bio.umass.edu> --------------- Erdös 4