I see this movement will do one of two things:
1. Fail horribly.
2. Fork the Internet into one based on TCP/IP and one based on TCP/MS.
Poor people and poor countries will not buy new computers just because
MS wants them to. If amazon.com stops supporting TCP/IP, I'll stop
using their site.
This puts businesses in the position of having to support two protocols,
most likely on two sets of servers (Just imagine Steve Balmer saying:
"I'm sorry Mr. Chenault, American Express will have to go out and buy
several hundred more web servers and routers to service the rest of the
world that refuses to use TCP/MS, or you face losing a large portion of
your global business.") or losing revenue. Not a pretty picture.
George
David Uhlman wrote:
>
> I, Cringley of pbs has some interesting commentary on the palladium mess at
> http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20010802.html (that's august 2001)
> and more currently at http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20020627.html
>
> It goes along the lines of what hans is/was saying.
>
> Sincerely,
> David Uhlman
> CTO 50km Inc.
> office(877-571-7679)
> mobile(602-770-9551)
> fax(509-752-3882)
> email(duhlman@50km.com)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "der.hans" <PLUGd@lufthans.com>
> To: <plug-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us>
> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2002 11:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Win32 API utterly and irreprarable broken
>
> > Am 08. Aug, 2002 schwätzte Robert Bushman so:
> >
> > > That's the problem - it is currently impossible
> > > to execute untrusted code on a Windows box safely.
> > > That's what the author means by "unfixable" - it's
> > > currently impossible to have a functional Windows
> > > box on which you can safely execute untrusted code.
> > >
> > > This is why Microsoft thinks Palladium is necessary.
> >
> > That's not why m$ thinks palladium is necessary. That's how m$ is getting
> > everyone else to think palladium is necessary.
> >
> > > They don't even grasp the fact that you can safely
> > > execute untrusted code if your operating system's
> > > security is designed correctly. So they have to
> > > implement this ridiculous scheme where every piece
> > > of code is authenticated by an outside authority.
> >
> > I find it difficult to believe that all the brain child engineering
> > geniouses its snapped in can't figure out how to make a secure system.
> >
> > m$ is a marketing company driven by the business need to control as much
> as
> > it can ( caveat emptor: buyer beware ).
> >
> > The constant gaping security holes allow its marketing division to
> > convince m$ customers that they need to turn over their private data and
> > entrust it all to m$.
> >
> > Why lock people/companies out with a proprietary data format when you can
> > force them to give you their data and ask your permission to use it?
> >
> > "Welcome to the Databank of Bill. Turn your head and cough."
> >
> > ciao,
> >
> > der.hans
> > --
> > # https://www.LuftHans.com/
> > # When you are tired of choosing the lesser of two evils,
> > # Vote Cthulhu for President!
> >
> > ________________________________________________
> > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't
> post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
> >
> > PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
> >
>
> ________________________________________________
> See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail.
>
> PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
> http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)