AOPA Flight Planner - Microsoft only?

Andrew,

Has this issue been raised to AOPA and ignored?


Yes, IIRC. They mentioned upon introduction that this is a very costly
thing to start with and that they'd rather deliver the service "only"
to the 92 or so percent of AOPA members using Windows than not have it
at all.

Personally, I have to agree with both AOPA and Peter. The vast majority
of AOPA members would have to consider a Mac/Linux-or-whatever version
a colossal waste of their money. And the "security by minority" scheme
doesn't work.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Personally, I have to agree with both AOPA and Peter. The vast majority
of AOPA members would have to consider a Mac/Linux-or-whatever version
a colossal waste of their money. And the "security by minority" scheme
doesn't work.

Um, I'm seeing a huge demand for offices to switch to Linux due to security
concerns. If you think "security by minority" is why Linux is more secure
then your words are extended beyond your knowledge. I am also baffled by
your opinion that Linux is a "collosal waste" of money. Price Windows XP
Pro and Office XP and compare to any of the commercially supported Linux
distributions with StarOffice or OpenOffice. Large corporations and
governments are indeed making the switch based on cost savings alone (e.g.,
Israel). Or pay the same price and instead of the product you get some
serious support, training and customization (e.g., Germany). Studies by
large corporations have shown that Linux is now easier to install than
Windows and is just as easy for end users to operate (e.g., Siemens).

But, you're entitled to your opinion.

Peter Gottlieb wrote:

Um, I'm seeing a huge demand for offices to switch to Linux due to security
concerns.

That's encouraging. My former employer was a Unix shop until about 1990. At that
time, the company converted to Windows over the strident objections of the engineers
and developers because the programs which management wanted to use (Lotus, Word,
Excel, etc.) all ran only on Windows. It would be nice to see a system such as
Linux be able to handle the needs of all levels of corporations.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 00:19:17 GMT, G.R. Patterson III wrote:

It would be nice to see a system such as
Linux be able to handle the needs of all levels of corporations.

I'd say that many (esp. small) companies might have the need for a win OS.
Let'S assume a small company of 5 to 10 people working with a computer.
What is their need? Most of their business related work is done with a
solution software, mostly only available for windows, therefore this OS,
with this software they manage their clients, write their bills, etc.

and then there is the need for email and browsing. you can choose Outlook
Express and Internet Explorer or any other freely available program. As
there are many security concerns with OE and IE I'd suggest anything else
to use.

Now: this company sometimes has the need to do a small calculation or write
some letters that can't be written with their solution software. This is
the time to make the decision for buying a Microsoft Office suite for about
200 or 300 bucks or you can have the same features for 0,- bucks
(OpenOffice). I can't understand companies with the above structure and
situation still buying a MS office suite, needing to register with MS,
never versions bringing DRM, closed source, etc.

#m

NB: Agent released version 2 of their newsreader. Time to upgrade!

--
A far-reaching proposal from the FBI (...) would require all broadband
Internet providers, including cable modem and DSL companies, to rewire
their networks to support easy wiretapping by police.
http://news.com.com/2100-1028-5172948.html

Martin Hotze wrote:

On Sat, 20 Mar 2004 00:19:17 GMT, G.R. Patterson III wrote:

It would be nice to see a system such as
Linux be able to handle the needs of all levels of corporations.

I'd say that many (esp. small) companies might have the need for a win OS.

My former employer topped out at over 8,000 employees in 2001. Hardly small.
Company policy was that every employee had a Windows desktop services login.
Coders would also have Unix and/or MVS logins. These would be accessed by using
something like telnet on the Windows box. As of 2002, all this was on NT with
no plans to change.

I can't understand companies with the above structure and
situation still buying a MS office suite, needing to register with MS,
never versions bringing DRM, closed source, etc.

The company also had a policy against using any sort of freeware. I don't know
why, but they felt they had excellent legal reasons to do so. Many other programs
(such as Word) were used because customers insisted on it.

George Patterson
Battle, n; A method of untying with the teeth a political knot that would
not yield to the tongue.

Peter,

Um, I'm seeing a huge demand for offices to switch to Linux due to security
concerns. If you think "security by minority" is why Linux is more secure
then your words are extended beyond your knowledge.

I think we can both agree that currently, the vast majority of "bad guys" is
trying their wares on Windows and Windows only. The major reason is that
their chance of hitting someone is so big. The claim that "Macs are so much
more secure" is, in that context, dubious since the Ma's security isn't
really tested.

As for Linux (and, subsequently, the latest Mac OS), the security
architecture might be better - and we might see.

I am also baffled by
your opinion that Linux is a "collosal waste" of money. Price Windows XP
Pro and Office XP and compare to any of the comme


That wasn't my opinion. Read back, please. My opinion was that AOPA would
have wasted money from the viewpoint of their Windows using members if they
had developed a Linux version.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)