Patching is far more complex in the Linux world than in Windows, because systems and what they run are far more diverse. But it's worth someone's business plan.
Linux and Open Source
The latest news and views on all things Linux and open source by seasoned Unix and Linux user Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols.
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, aka sjvn, has been writing about technology and the business of technology since CP/M-80 was the cutting edge PC operating system. SJVN covers networking, Linux, open source, and operating systems.
Paula Rooney is a Boston-based writer who has followed the tech industry for more than two decades.
Would an OSI which accepted what Microsoft, and other proprietary companies, want to deem "open" be stepping up or knuckling under?
While the general public may just pirate software and movies, government must be more circumspect.
If Laura DiDio really has come around on the advantages of Linux and open source, I thought, check for flying pigs.
Windows problems are so common that even home-based users know they must pay a $50/year "user tax" in order to have an anti-virus company manage the delivery of patches to them. Is there a way to deliver that value to open source users without delivering that cost?
In order for desktop Linux to succeed, it needs a Killer App that does not exist in Windows, a compelling set of applications that will cause people to switch.
Short version of LMI's statement. That was just a preliminary decision. There are nasty people trying to seize this trademark in other countries. Send money.
The attitude of American regulators toward the Internet today is charitably described as proprietary.
Where does this leave the Linux Mark Institute, which was set up to defend the trademark? Nowhere, down under.
There is, of course, a kind of hidden agenda here, namely a Microsoft plug-in for Visual Studio dubbed Grasshopper which they figure will be in the hands of the winners before the race starts.