CIFS will be strategic in some settings, but not included in kernel

[Joel Rees]

I'm debating with myself whether to send this, because I don't want  
to make people mad, with the result of closed minds, but sometimes  
you have to be politically incorrect:

On Aug 26, 2008, at 5:24 AM, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:

> George Hunt wrote:
>> I think the interface should just work, without installing  
>> anything. But
>> I realize this is a touchy subject. I'm willing to go along with the
>> general thinking on the issue.
>
> I think a "just works" solution for M$ machines, i.e. SMB/CIFS,  
> would be
> huge.

In more ways than one.

The nay-sayers warned us what opening that box would bring.

I don't think a lot of people recognize that this is just another  
form of social engineering on the part of Microsoft's marketing crew.

> Everyone knows how to "share" their folders.

"Everyone" in this sense means all the people who have learned how to  
use bad tech. "Share a folder" in this context means "use a GUI to to  
open a hole in their file system without much of anything to defend it".

> Almost nobody will
> set up IIS just to share a few files.

Which is why putting that OS on the XO is a lot like making a chalice  
of gold and pouring in tap water from Egypt. Just because the good  
people of Egypt, as they grow up, develop biological mechanisms to  
deal with the bugs doesn't mean that the children of so-called  
developed countries should drink their water, nor that we should go  
to the trouble of exporting tap water from Egypt to, say, Uruguay.

But in this case, it would be doubly bad, because, if we do it, we  
are bringing the digital diseases from the so-called developed world  
to those who have no infrastructure of local "PC" shops and experts  
at all to sell (or pirate for) them anti-virus software and such.

> You would get literally 100x as
> many users for the former feature as the latter.

That would create a huge demand for MSCEs in the various countries  
where this is done. But are you willing to go work among them at  
their wages? Three cheers for you if you are, but wouldn't it be  
better to give them stuff that has at least half a chance of not  
becoming yet another bot farm?

> IMHO of course.  And
> Linux and Mac already implement SMB/CIFS, so it's a solution that  
> works
> pretty much universally today.


In somebody's definition of "works", in the universe of an industry  
which has developed a certain acceptance (although, not resistance)  
to the malware.

Sorry if I'm being to blunt about this, but if the argument of volume  
of installed systems has any merit at all, it also militates against  
helping the countries for which the XO is a target to get more OSses  
from Microsoft.

Joel Rees