Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 18th May 2007 22:17 UTC
Some of the changes in the upcoming release of Windows Server 2008 are a response to features and performance advantages that have made Linux an attractive option to Microsoft customers. One of these is the fact that Linux has less of a surface area, which led customers to believe that Linux is inherently more secure, Bill Laing, the general manager for Microsoft's Windows Server division, told eWEEK. "Having less surface area does reduce the servicing and the amount of code you have running and exposed, so we have done a lot of work in 2008 to make the system more modular. There are more than 30 components not installed by default, which is a huge change," Laing said. "We also have server core, which doesn't have the GUI, so I would say that is a response to the options people had with Linux that they didn't have with Windows."
Permalink for comment 241752
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2007-05-17
Clearly YOU have not tried any of those Linux versions. There is no need to say anything about them. Vista users will not listen, as they are still trying to convince themselves they made a good purchase and did not just pour money down the sink, and Linux user do not need to listen as that is just preaching to the choir.
Now, if you really want to see what Linux offers over Vista, have a peep at this...
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/568086/ubuntu_with_beryl/
Excuses. You'd have listed the features that set linux apart in the first place if there were any, posting ad hoc arguments just to prove people wrong shows you were full of it. As it is, windows has lots of programs that do similar 3D window things and nobody really uses them or wants them which is why MS didn't add them to Vista, with DWM it would have been easy and near-free performance wise to add any of these effects, they are goofy and geeky, not mainstream and useful, so they are not going into MS OS's by design.
Microsoft CANNOT remove IE from Windows, they said so in a court of law..
http://www.windowsitpro.com/Windows/Article/ArticleID/20715/20715.h.....
That doesn't include the exact wordering that MS used, and it does not matter, when MS said it could not be done, it meant within time restraints, because any code can be changed with enough time, they just meant that there wasn't enough time to change windows to seperate IE and the judge disagreed. This was before Vista, by time Vista came around MS had enough time to seperate IE, which raises the question, why aren't you just happy with the outcome and leave it at that, you wanted IE seperate and got it, and are still complaining, obviously you just want MS destroyed and could care less what you say.
Edited 2007-05-19 17:49