Skip to main content

Sweeping statements

On Sunday 19 February 2006 05:36, Webroot Software wrote:

Tip #2: Just Say NO! to Freeware

Um. That statement is a bit, hah, sweeping.

You probably need to qualify the term “freeware” a bit better, or choose a more accurate one which includes some shareware. You went on to explain:

Remember that old saying: “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.” Well, it’s definitely true when it comes to freeware, which often includes spyware in its program files.

There’s another problem here: while TANSTAAFL does indeed universally apply, it is often possible to rearrange an existing situation to eliminate waste and duplication of effort. The resulting improvement can look like a free lunch without actually being one.

I call to witness Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, PuTTY, WinSCP, The GIMP, 7-Zip and the cornucopia of other capital-F-Free and capital-O-Open software available even under MS-Windows. These are the result of collaboration erasing a lot of wasted effort.

My favourite Linux distribution ships with roughly ten thousand such packages, a reasonable cross-section of the FOSS available out there, and all of them 100% spyware-free.

Deploying Firefox and Thunderbird will significantly reduce spyware infestations all by themselves, since MSIE and MSOutlook are both easier to invade and more often directly targeted by spyware (and viruses).

I appreciate that you have a marketing need to wake innocents up to the dangers they face when they install software “blind”, but you’ve used a literary grenade when you needed a sharpshooter. Some of the software I rely on daily has been caught in the crossfire.

Please publish a clarification in a future Tip.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...