[maemo-users] Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)

From: kenneth marken kemarken at broadpark.no
Date: Fri Mar 13 13:38:15 EET 2009
James Knott wrote:
> George Farris wrote:
>> On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 22:15 -0600, Mark Haury wrote:
>>> James Knott wrote:
>>> Windows doesn't need (never has, and never will) to have the capability for 
>>> simultaneous users. What would be the point? As PCs continue to shrink in size 
>>> as they increase in power, it makes a lot more sense for everybody to have their 
>>> own separate computer and not share someone else's. Home networking is a 
>>> no-brainer if they want or need to share anything.
>> The point my friend, would be to separate the different processes such
>> as apache, postfix, desktop apps etc into different user ids thus
>> gaining a logical, built in, separation of security boundaries.
> The point I made about Citrix is that many companies have a need to run
> multiple users on a server.  Citrix came up with a way to make that
> possible, as Windows by itself can't do that.  While you can have
> multiple users on Windows, they can't be on at the same time.  That sort
> of thing comes standard with Linux or Unix.
i could have sworn that microsoft have remote desktop now.

hell, the story goes that microsoft killed of smart displays as it would 
be a cheap way to do multi-user on xp home. something that would 
undermine their more expensive multi-user licenses on win2k3 (where, 
iirc, you pay ones for the os, and ones for the number of users you want 
able to access the system at the same time).

More information about the maemo-users mailing list