In 2002, both KDE and GNOME released their last major revisions; KDE released KDE 3.0 on 3rd April, while GNOME followed shortly after with GNOME 2.0 on 27th June. For the Linux desktop, therefore, 2002 was an important year. Since then, we have continiously been fed point releases which added bits of functionaility and speed improvements, but no major revision has yet seen the light of day. What's going on?
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-04-21
It is making use of intel's hardware buffer overflow protection, It will not allow unsigned drivers to load into the system (XP allowed user override),
Well that'll go a long way to making Linux driver support as good as Windows, without a single line of code from Messrs Torvald or Cox! ;-)
Member since:2006-08-02
It is making use of intel's hardware buffer overflow protection, It will not allow unsigned drivers to load into the system (XP allowed user override)
I like control of my system and if I want to override something I don't want the OS telling me no. Besides, I believe the real reason for not allowing unsigned drivers and kernel patches is due to DRM. If you could easily load a hacked video driver then I bet HDCP wouldn't last to long.
Member since:2006-04-21
Every version of Windows gets the praise "the first version of Windows that one could consider to be usable". And then 6 months down the line everyone's complaining about the viruses, the spyware, having to reinstall because it's slowed to a crawl due to the registry being full of crap, etc.
Why should it be different this time? It isn't. except that it's 7 times as big, MS in their wisdom have not only kept the registry but extended it (boot settings used to be in boot.ini, now they're in a registry hive), they wrote this "great new secret security API" which they have now been forced to open, OEM's aren't interested, and MS aren't bothering to market it.
Member since:
2005-11-09
I have used nothing but Linux and OS X for the last 5 years and I must say you have no idea what you are talking about. Vista is probably the first version of windows that one can consider to be usable. I plan to use the 64 bit version simply because MS has made all nice security bells and whistles available to it due to the cutting off legacy support.
It is making use of intel's hardware buffer overflow protection, It will not allow unsigned drivers to load into the system (XP allowed user override), and best of all... the system files will load at random offsets at each boot which will make remote attacks nearly impossible.