Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 18:29:00 +0100 From: Mark Ovens <mark@ukug.uk.freebsd.org> To: Roelof Osinga <roelof@nisser.com> Cc: Annelise Anderson <andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu>, Jay Nelson <jdn@acp.qiv.com>, cjc26@cornell.edu, freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: (fwd) CNN - Crypto expert: Microsoft products leave door opentoNSA - September 3, 1999 (fwd) Message-ID: <19990907182859.A283@marder-1> In-Reply-To: <37D47681.9F58E0E4@nisser.com>; from Roelof Osinga on Tue, Sep 07, 1999 at 04:20:49AM %2B0200 References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9909061712570.96788-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu> <37D47681.9F58E0E4@nisser.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 07, 1999 at 04:20:49AM +0200, Roelof Osinga wrote: > > As to just how little cryptographic security means to businesses, just > consider the fact that the rest of the world takes the 40-bit encryption > of US-export products for granted. And has done so for years. That is > truly amazing. Even countries part of the NATO pact aren't allowed > to have 128 bit encryption and they accept this. Go figure. The same > of course holds for a ratty product as Windows 3.1 and Windows 95. Whole > branches of industry have standardized on them. Why? > Hasn't the US govt recently been generous and allowed 56-bit encryption to be exported? ISTR that "export" versions of IE now have it, or is M$ a special case? Anyway, who cares what the US govt thinks, says, or does about encryption? We all have PGP which is as much as 512 (or is it 1024?) bit. > Another nice thing about small businesses is that they don't really > care about gizmo's and userfriendliness. Not when explained right, that > is. Sure, userfriendliness is important, but not in the MS sense. > No daft electronic paperclip is going to up sales, no matter how user > friendly MS thinks it is. What a small business needs is low cost and > high productivity. > Hmm, I'm not so sure that I agree with that. M$ (mainly) has created a mentality amongst PC users whereby they have to have the latest version. I've seen plenty of examples of people who always upgrade(?) to the latest version of Office but the documents they produce with it could have been produced with Word 2, or even that classic WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS. Many people use the new "features" just because they are there, not because they *need* them. > Still, a thing that is missing from both Linux and the xBSDs is the > catering for the utter dimwit. I mean, ever tried installing OpenBSD, > say? That is pure 70s and 80s. But even something as, comparatively, > slick as FreeBSD still lacks in that department. We are talking about > people that don't know about computers, don't care about computers > and don't want to both know or care about computers. Something Microsoft > understands all too well. > Yes, but installing an OS should be a one-off thing whereas with Windows the solution, even from "professional" support desks, to a problem can very quickly become: "Try re-installing Windows". I think is was Greg Lehey who said; "With Unix, re-installing is hardly ever an option". If you have to repeatedly re-install the OS then an installer for "the utter dimwit" becomes a necessity. > Thus, you basically have a choice. Either you do sorta what Microsoft > does or you say the heck with it. The former does have severe consequences, > though it can be done. Just think going from 3.1 to 3.2 and facing a > sendmail diff. No way that can be allowed to happen, since there'll > be none among your target audience that can deal with it. Great for > the consultants among us, but bad for marketing. Somehow I can't see > all people caring enough all the time. Call me cynical <g>. > > The latter is what we got now. Personally I think that is just right. > The price is great, the fun is great. And all the while the inkblot > is spreading, albeit slowly. While it is spreading, capability in > every regards is increasing. So Microsoft has the slicker product > that is used more by the masses. So who cares. We're not the > ones with the slogan: "A million lemmings can't be wrong!" ;). > > Roelof > > -- > Home is where the (@) http://eboa.com/ is. > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message -- STATE-OF-THE-ART: Any computer you can't afford. OBSOLETE: Any computer you own. ________________________________________________________________ FreeBSD - The Power To Serve http://www.freebsd.org My Webpage http://ukug.uk.freebsd.org/~mark/ mailto:mark@ukug.uk.freebsd.org http://www.radan.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990907182859.A283>