[ILUG] This just keeps getting stupider by the word.

[Brian O'Donoghue]

Although I will say that it does give IT Admin firms who base
themselves solely on Windows a slight advantage, due to the availability
of pre-written marketing materials.

Yeah marketing materials aimed at marketing people.. I mean seriously what
sort of techie would believe that a unix system 'Unix derived from AT&T...
the crowed who made that language ... what was it called 'C'.. and that
other one ... 'C++'' wouldn't have any support for objects.... hmm call me a
pendant, but C++ supports OO last time I checked... so unless M$ have some
vital scrap of info I'm not party to... this entire article seems like the
thick end of a big blue propaganda plot.
But for me where it get dangerous is here
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992449
quote 'Future versions of the Windows operating system will be designed to
run only digitally signed code, to stop hackers uploading malicious programs
and to prevent computer viruses from spreading. '

further quote
'Two of the world's biggest microprocessor manufacturers, Intel and AMD,
have agreed to design new hardware to support the design, which Microsoft
says could be available in 2004.'

Now call me a paranoid, but these seems like an allusion to M$ only
hardware, hardware which require code to be 'digitally signed' and since
this hardware will be built in conjunction with m$... does that mean that
your average guy learning C on a *nix system will have to what compile (n)
bytes of digital signature into his hello world program such that it will
run on M$'s security hardware... or worse yet that once such hardware is
introduced that it will be impossible to use anything but windows on an x86
arch?