Comments on: Cybercrime Rises and Vista 7 is Already Open to Hijackers http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/ Free Software Sentry – watching and reporting maneuvers of those threatened by software freedom Fri, 25 Nov 2016 09:41:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.14 By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-2/#comment-57324 Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:59:14 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57324 Have a look at LXDE.

]]> By: David Gerard http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-2/#comment-57321 Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:49:57 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57321 Oh yeah. If I wanted responsiveness I’d go back to KDE 3.59. But KDE 4.1 is so niiiiiice.

Here’s to software freedom!

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-2/#comment-57318 Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:42:20 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57318 That may be true, but you can get Linux 2.6.27 without all that ‘fat’ (lightweight distros are on ‘the menu’). You can hardly achieve this with other operating systems that adhere to the one-size-fits-all approach.

]]> By: David Gerard http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-1/#comment-57316 Sat, 03 Jan 2009 20:39:25 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57316 Vista is fat as hell. Mind you, KDE4 is also fat as hell – I’ve been experimenting with XP in a VirtualBox lately, and was somewhat disconcerted to find that Firefox 3 in XP in a VM assigned 384MB was more responsive than Firefox 3 in the native Kubuntu installation using the 1GB installed …

I have nothing against using lots of memory and CPU to give people a good user experience – KDE4 is fat, Mac OS X is fat, GNOME is fat, for this reason. I do have something against using lots of memory and CPU to fail to inflict DRM on everyone …

]]> By: Roy Bixler http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-1/#comment-57204 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:02:10 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57204

It is true that Vista is better than XP. But that’s saying so little …

My understanding is that it’s a mixed bag and that there are a significant number of users that have problems with Vista and prefer to use XP instead. Admittedly, I’m not a Windows user but an anecdote I’ve heard recently from my brother-in-law who is a Windows user is that he has a friend who recently bought a laptop which runs Vista. It has 3 Gig. RAM and still skips when playing videos. He is not keen to “upgrade” to Vista and instead considers that it may be time to buy a Mac.

]]> By: Roy Schestowitz http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-1/#comment-57202 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:48:20 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57202 In terms of security?

]]> By: David Gerard http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-1/#comment-57200 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:47:11 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57200 It is true that Vista is better than XP. But that’s saying so little …

]]> By: Diamond Wakizashi http://techrights.org/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/comment-page-1/#comment-57144 Fri, 02 Jan 2009 00:27:27 +0000 http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/01/vista-7-not-secure/#comment-57144 I wish Microshit and it’s bitch Novell a horrible new year!

]]>