[117630] in Cypherpunks
Re: Build a better OTP?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Anonymous)
Tue Sep 7 16:38:33 1999
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 22:16:02 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <199909072016.WAA21442@mail.replay.com>
From: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Reply-To: Anonymous <nobody@replay.com>
> Keep in mind that from the marketing point of view, Windows is
> used far more than Linux. Very few manufacturers support Linux
> compared to Windows, so it is not fair to single Intel out for
> this criticism.
Fer chrissake, I thought that Intel was selling *hardware*, not
operating systems -- this shouldn't be a "Windows vs. Linux"
issue at all! (For instance, neither of these operating systems
are likely to be used in embedded crypto applications, where a
hardware RNG would be invaluable.)
This attempt to couple the behaviour of a hardware device (with a
life span > 10 years) to a specific operating system (with a life
span < 5 years) runs contrary to sound engineering practices.
In most parts of the industry, a chip manufacturer that tried
this trick -- advertising capabilities that could only be
achieved by means of proprietary binary drivers tied to a single
software package from another vendor -- would be laughed out of
business.
Intel isn't in the business of making operating systems. And
from an engineering point of view, the argument should be about
getting Intel to properly document hardware that they claim to
provide -- not about getting them to write a driver for another
of the 20+ x86 operating systems out there.
