Originally posted by CliffLandin
on IE as opposed to any other browser. There are also very few viruses written for Linux or Mac, but most people continue to use Windows. Why?
Win 95b and onward have been extremely stable. Stability is not compromised by windows programs, but windows applications written by 3rd parties. As example, I can write an infinite loop at any point and use up 99% CPU, effectively crippling an OS. This is poor programming, but no reason to claim that Windows is failing. Either way, taskmanager should sort out the problem.
As for I.E, I now use Netscape, but only because someone assumed I wanted MS's search engine taskbar instead of Google. MS's technologies are very impressive and uniform around the board. E.G. I can use I.E for digital certificates and many other features specific to windows.
Virus. The only reason MS is targeted is because of its reputation. Odds are 90% of the hackers are Unix/Linux programmers with long hair/long beards who hate Bill Gates. Linux have also recently falled prey of hackers and with its increase in popularity, it will suffer the same shortfalls MS does. As for Linux being free, for home users yes, but should you use Debian or any other Linux server it often comes to the same end total after purchasing all Linux add-ons.
Granted the penguin is cute, but the system is just a bee atch to learn. Had it installed on my laptop and simple tasks such as browsing a directory was just too foreign. The incentives to switch to Linux was simply not sufficient.
As I work for an MBS gold partner reseller, I guess I may be biassed 😉
Originally posted by pcaspianA little experiment. Sit down at any machine running Windows, go to the the Systems folder and start installing scripts, renaming and deleting files. And you have trashed Windows completely -- just as a virus does.
Originally posted by CliffLandin
[b] on IE as opposed to any other browser. There are also very few viruses written for Linux or Mac, but most people continue to use Windows. Why?
Win 95b and onward have been extremely stable. Stability is not compromised by windows programs, but windows applications written by 3rd parties. As example, I can ...[text shortened]... mply not sufficient.
As I work for an MBS gold partner reseller, I guess I may be biassed 😉[/b]
Now try it on a Linux/Unix machine. File premissions means you can not see the operating system files, cannot delete the OS files and can not damage them - unless of course you can get hold of a root password. And since even the dumbest Linux users do not run as root, viruses can not spread effectively through Linux machines.
Linux is a multi-user system - designed like Unix to have untrusted people having access to memory and disk space. And that - not Windows hating hackers - makes linux much more secure than the Microsoft product.
I will state it clearly - viruses are spread only because Microsoft did not build adequate security into DOS. They knew how to do it but did not back in the 1980s becsause DOS ran on unconnected personal computers and Bill decided it was unnecessary. And now they would have to change three decades of programs to put security in to stop the virus plague.
Originally posted by pcaspianThis really is false. I have my technophopic 75year old mother using Red Hat Linux v.9. She has had less problems than with her Windows comp and finds it to be much more intuitive. She says that the layout of the GUI with items in the Start menu laid out by application type rather than just Programs is much easier and the fact that it never ever freezes, locks or has to be restarted.
Originally posted by CliffLandin
[b]
Granted the penguin is cute, but the system is just a bee atch to learn. Had it installed on my laptop and simple tasks such as browsing a directory was just too foreign. The incentives to switch to Linux was simply not sufficient.
[/b]
I will say that Windows is much more stable than it was, but it still has a long way to go. I don't know what version of Linux you were running, but a Unix type file system is much easier for people once you unlearn the bizarre Windows layout. You can copy and paste, drag and drop and do many things just like in Windows, but the Unix file tree is much easier to understand. I suggest that you try a different version of Linux and take the five minutes needed to figure out the file system.
Once you go Open Source you never go back.
😀
First of all, Linux can run without X Windows, without a GUI. It can be a complete firewall and not have wasted resources for a GUI. It can be an MP3 player, and not require a GUI. There are many applications out there that expect to have its input from the standard input.
Another benefit is piping. You can list a directories contents using ls, but then you can pipe it to the regular expression parser, grep.
ls -la | grep the | more
That line lists all the files with permissions and owner details, then grabs only those with the word "the" in them, and in case it doesn't fit on one console page, it pipes it to more to have the pages split. Try doing that on Windows or even DOS. Running "ls -la * | grep the > list.txt" will run recursively through the directories, listing all files and their permissions and owners, then grabs only the filenames with "the" in them, and then puts it into list.txt file.
If your PC is fast enough you can do the same thing when burning CDs from the console by piping mkisofs to cdrecord directly.
The other part I like is the /dev directory. All devices appear as files under the /dev directory. In fact, you can pipe a wave file straight to the /dev/pcm device and have it play out your speakers. Try doing that with Windows or DOS. Even hard drives, CD-ROM/DVD-ROM, and SCSI devices are all there. In fact, the old line printers (the Star Micronics and so on) wouldn't even need drivers, you could pipe the commands straight to /dev/lp0 (lp0 here just refers to the first LPT port). Of course, using CUPS allows using PPMs to drive your printer.
Even if you are never going to use this, and stick to using a GUI like KDE or Gnome, one that is user friendly and has options to act like MacOS, Windows and Sun, it shows how Linux is for complete enthusiasts to technophobics like Cliff's mum.
Originally posted by steerpike
A little experiment. Sit down at any machine running Windows, go to the the Systems folder and start installing scripts, renaming and deleting files. And you have trashed Windows completely -- just as a virus does.
Now try it on a Linux/Unix machine. File premissions means you can not see the operating system files, cannot delete the OS files and can not damage them - unless of course you can get hold of a root password. And since even the dumbest Linux users do not run as root, viruses can not spread effectively through Linux machines.
Sure.
I can however also implement a windows policy which acts in a very similar way to anyone wishing to use my PC. I'm not denying that windows isn't failsafe, but claiming that unless you're out to purposefully destroy an unprotected PC, you really should not have any issues with it.
Perhaps it is because I spend at minimum 10 hours a day infront of my PC, not sure TBH, but I haven't needed to re-install my machine since its original install maby 2 years ago. MS's constant XP and Win 2000 updates are a dream come true for stability and security. No, I wouldn't trust SP2's firewall, but then any machine running a software firewall will be prone to hacking. The safest PC is one where the power is turned off !
Simply put, Win SP2's firewall + auto updates from McAfee means my machine is safe. That does not require a significant amount of PC knowhow, and if someone can run linux, they surely can master basic Windows security.
Originally posted by pcaspianMy point is - plenty of people are trying to destroy your PC. And they don't have to sit down in front of it to do it - just login at an internet cafe anywhere in the world.
Originally posted by steerpike
[b]A little experiment. Sit down at any machine running Windows, go to the the Systems folder and start installing scripts, renaming and deleting files. And you have trashed Windows completely -- just ...[text shortened]... n linux, they surely can master basic Windows security.
[/b][/i]
Software patches and virus auto-updates are reactive - they work only if you can fix the vulnerability before it is exploited. And as soon as they are published, hackers can work out how they can use this knowledge to gain access and damage machines. I agree that it is possible to run a secure Windows systems - but you have to be continually patching. And the price you pay is not just the intial license fees, but required updates of all your software as old versions become unsupported plus ongoing license fees - without support, your system soon falls over. How do you think Bill Gates became a billionaire?
Each to their own - I prefer a system which has security built in and where an ugrade is just a download away.
Originally posted by steerpikeOn a more personal note.
My point is - plenty of people are trying to destroy your PC. And they don't have to sit down in front of it to do it - just login at an internet cafe anywhere in the world.
Software patches and virus auto-updates are reactive - they work only if you can fix the vulnerability before it is exploited. And as soon as they are published, hackers can work ...[text shortened]... efer a system which has security built in and where an ugrade is just a download away.
Have you ever thought of just getting away from all the crap that you think is universal truth when you get out?
Why not go to Arizona and learn how to rebuild airplanes?
You would be good at that. If you dare.
Originally posted by steerpikeGreat. Did you even read my post? I explained why most people use Windows today.
Maybe five years ago you needed to know the shell and command line stuff - not any more.
Because at that time you still needed to know how to navigate a shell to get anything done in early releases of Linux.
'The masses' use Windows today and it won't change very quickly - Why change something that works? Sure it crashes once a week, but the user just restarts, logs in and continues working.
I never switch off my machine and my Windows XP Pro just keeps on chugging on. Like I said before, just use a little patience and your machine won't crash.
I have a old machine running RedHat 6, but I just use it for it's Apache webserver to test some web development. It's running on an old Pentium I 300 with 64MB RAM. This is what's impressive about Linux. You can basically pick up an old PC off a scrap heap, hook it up to a CDROM and install Linux on it.
Originally posted by CrowleyYea. But you can buy 300 hundred dumb boxes (150$ US) and log them into Citrix Server with four processors and 50 gig of memory ( for about 3000 dollars) and work two hundred people from anywhere in the world with the click of an icon. All on SQL server... which repairs and copies itself every night as you proscribe. And rebuilds it's indexes and distributes a thousand crystal reports around the globe as you say.
Great. Did you even read my post? I explained why most people use Windows today.
Because [b]at that time you still needed to know how to navigate a shell to get anything done in early releases of Linux.
'The masses' use Windows t ...[text shortened]... C off a scrap heap, hook it up to a CDROM and install Linux on it.[/b]
SQL server... which repairs....itself every night....Yeah, that sounds about right. SQL Server needs repairing nearly every day.... and how often do you need to reboot Windows? Every 3 months or so?
You need to try Oracle mate - it doesn't break down all the time, and Linux stays up for years.
I have been using Mac OS X for a while now because my windows machine just isn't reliable at staying connected to the internet on a wireless network.
I was brought up on Mac operating systems, and when I first used 10 I thought it was too slow and I didn't like the graphics, but as we got updates I have changed my mind - I think it is far superior to Windows XP (which I actually used to really like until I changed over). One of the reasons, which may seem superficial, is that it is visually a much nicer experience. This really counts if you spend long hours using the OS - you feel much more relaxed and happy from the wonderful ambience. But it's not just looks, its a really strong operating system as well, which NEVER crashes! 🙂 (unlike Windows unfortunately - my PC used to crash all the time for no apparent reason.
I will definitely get Tiger when it is released - some of the features look awesome, like the new Sherlock.
On a Mac everything seems so much friendlier and easier i.e. no multiple instances of programs cluttering things up when you need more than window, and the best bit is if you hold down shift while minimizing a window, it does it's 'shrinking to the dock' animation in slow motion!😀😀 If you've got a Mac, try it! Oh, and you can have as many different digital pictures as you like as backgrounds to your folder windows. Brilliant!
Originally posted by pcaspianMicrosoft actually recommends that you do a complete format of your harddrive and reinstall windows every six months. Six months! I didn't restart my comp for six months.
Originally posted by steerpike
A little experiment. Sit down at any machine running Windows, go to the the Systems folder and start installing scripts, renaming and deleting files. And you have trashed Windows completely -- just as ...[text shortened]... e can run linux, they surely can master basic Windows security.
If you think that the 80mb service pack 2 is keeping your comp completely safe, you are dreaming. McAfee is crap. I recommend that you go and get Kaspersky anti-virus and buy Ad-Aware PRO. They are both more effective than McAfee.
Here is a little interesting fact: If you do format your computer and install Windows updated to the latest services pack and then you install AA-Pro it will find spyware on your computer. Yes, MS is spying on you. It will actually find it if you don't upgrade to the latest service pack, but it will also find it if you upgrade to SP2.
And, once again, it doesn't require a significant know how to run Linux, it does to be a power user in Linux, but the same can be said of Windows.
And trust me, your comp isn't safe just because you are running McAffe and service pack 2. Really, I wouldn't lie to you.
If every Windows user switched to Linux, I'm sure evil-doers would cause havoc, even though the inherent security in Linux is better than in Windows. Malware may be harder to write for Linux, but if the user is dumb enough, anything goes. In Linux you have the power to do real destructive stuff without paper-clips and pop-ups warning you:
If you aim the gun at your foot and pull the trigger, it's Unix's job to ensure reliable delivery of the bullet to where you aimed the gun (in this case, Mr. Foot). --Terry Lambert
An e-mail telling people to 'sudo ./malicious_attached_program' or similar would probably fool a lot of mindless users.
Personally I prefer Linux. Not because of security issues but because of the flexibility. If you know what you're doing, you can do stuff from the command-line that no point'n'clicker would think possible and open source software is available for pretty much any task. At home I use Mac OS X (which actually is a nice compromise between point'n'click eye candy and Unix power) cause I'm to lazy to maintain a Linux installation.