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

[From: kenneth marken]

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).