What is Linux missing that you would require to complete get off Windows?

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: vash

I have few problems with what you said, except for the part I bolded. The intelligent Win32 users I know want security also and hate the fact Windows comes so open by default.

Well, all intelligent Win32 users know of the security holes and plug 'em right away. We know where to find and plug problems and we do it quick, so its no bother to us. All "power" Win32 users know and understand the power of all *nix variants, but don't use them one reason or another (for day to day use). If a VAC supported Half-Life client came out for Linux, I'd be one of the first people to ditch my Win32 partition.

vash

I dont know where all the holes are and the fixes to most of them. Id have to spend a few days learning how to patch them and fix what Ive screwed up when I get some instructions wrong. That doesnt sound too userfriendly to me. Why cant it come locked down and make me open up the security holes? It sounds like a much better solution for a newbie like myself.

And, its many of these "power users" that are keeping code red alive

 

[vash]

I dont know where all the holes are and the fixes to most of them. Id have to spend a few days learning how to patch them and fix what Ive screwed up when I get some instructions wrong. That doesnt sound too userfriendly to me. Why cant it come locked down and make me open up the security holes? It sounds like a much better solution for a newbie like myself.

And, its many of these "power users" that are keeping code red alive

Remember the mentality of a *nix user vs. the mentality of a Win32 user. With *nix, you WANT everything SHUT OFF from the get go because of security. For a standard Win32 user, you want it all ON for ease of use, interoperability, etc.

Its the *nix pride that baits questions like this.

FYI - code red was a nasty problem, but NEVER affected my Apache 1.3.2 server running on Win32 Real power users don't trust IIS, no matter how patched it is.

vash

 

[Nothinman]

FYI - code red was a nasty problem, but NEVER affected my Apache 1.3.2 server running on Win32

It ate your bandwidth just as well as everyone else's. Just because you didn't propogate it doesn't mean you weren't affected.

 

[vash]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

FYI - code red was a nasty problem, but NEVER affected my Apache 1.3.2 server running on Win32

It ate your bandwidth just as well as everyone else's. Just because you didn't propogate it doesn't mean you weren't affected.

Fine. I concede that it probably affected numerous of other people's websites, bandwidth, etc. But code red couldn't infect my Win32 server and I couldn't spread it. When I hear of IIS problems, I just smile because IIS was the first thing I uninstalled with my Win2k server.

vash

 

[TheOmegaCode]

The only things that keep me from using windows are:
games, I really only play once a month or so at LAN's,
good support for my CLIE, i've tried coldsync but I really don't like it,
movies, the collection i have uses whacky MS codec's that barely work in Windows.
If I were a good coder, then I could fix my last two complaints, but well, I'm not...
I probably only boot into windows about once every day now, for a few minutes, then shut my computer down...

To be honest though, I'm not someone that has a HUGE beef with windows, I just want to learn other operating systems.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: vash

I dont know where all the holes are and the fixes to most of them. Id have to spend a few days learning how to patch them and fix what Ive screwed up when I get some instructions wrong. That doesnt sound too userfriendly to me. Why cant it come locked down and make me open up the security holes? It sounds like a much better solution for a newbie like myself.

And, its many of these "power users" that are keeping code red alive

Remember the mentality of a *nix user vs. the mentality of a Win32 user. With *nix, you WANT everything SHUT OFF from the get go because of security. For a standard Win32 user, you want it all ON for ease of use, interoperability, etc.

Its the *nix pride that baits questions like this.

FYI - code red was a nasty problem, but NEVER affected my Apache 1.3.2 server running on Win32 Real power users don't trust IIS, no matter how patched it is.

vash

I use both. I dont want to spend 3 days getting my brand spanking new Win2k machine into a usably secure setup. Im not a power user, so I dont know how to secure it all that well. Security should be on everyone's list. #1 on each in fact. If you want something, turn it on. Forget this open by default, please 0wn me crap.

 

[Nothinman]

the collection i have uses whacky MS codec's that barely work in Windows.

A lot of the WMV and WMA files play just fine with mplayer or xine, xine even uses the same win32 dlls as media player.

 

[IamDavid]

Last time I tried Linux I liked it all except the browsers. I can't live without IE. If there was a way to use IE easily in Linux I would jump aboard but not till then.

 

[Nothinman]

I can't live without IE. If there was a way to use IE easily in Linux I would jump aboard but not till then.

That's funny, cause I'm the exact opposite. I can't stand using IE anymore, I use Mozilla on Windows and Galeon on Linux. The only time I start IE is when I need to hit WindowsUpdate. It's so great stopping popups without additional software, being able to right-click->block images from this server to stop banners, using tabbed browsing, etc.

 

[IamDavid]

I know other browsers are better but its what I "grew up on". If IE was compatible I would go with Linux right away. Some bad habits are just to hard to break though. lol

 

[Nothinman]

I know other browsers are better but its what I "grew up on"

I grew up on IE too, but it didn't take much to get me off of it. Install Mozilla on Windows and use it for a bit, use the middle mouse button on links to open them in new tabs, use the middle button to close tabs, try it because it gets real addicting.

 

[vash]

I use both. I dont want to spend 3 days getting my brand spanking new Win2k machine into a usably secure setup. Im not a power user, so I dont know how to secure it all that well. Security should be on everyone's list. #1 on each in fact. If you want something, turn it on. Forget this open by default, please 0wn me crap.

Three days to get a Win32 box secure? Cmon now, it takes less than an hour (counting the countless reboots) to get the box going as SUPER secure as Win32 can be. To get a reasonably secure system it takes a bit less time than that, but it definitely doesn't take long to make Win32 as secure as it can be. If you want links, we'll post 'em for ya.

Security should be on a lot of people's list as important for their computer. Remember this: security is one of the most important things *nix people look at (the entire UNIX OS is designed in this manner). For Win32, security is definitely lower on the list, simply for convenience and usability.

Remember the mentality of a *nix person vs. Win32 user. *nix IS a secure system, NOT easily touchable by the rest of the world by default. A Win32 user WANTS the system touchable by the rest of the world (its a lot easier to communicate with the local network, peripherals, applications, etc). With the advent of XP, DSL and cable modems, more and more people are beginning to learn that security should be more important that file swapper applications. Linux will see more popularity with people sick of Win32 and are too lazy to learn how to turn things OFF.

Again, its the security of the OS vs. the simplicity of doing things. Win32 is made for everyone to run-n-go. *nix wasn't made with this in mind.

vash

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: vash

I use both. I dont want to spend 3 days getting my brand spanking new Win2k machine into a usably secure setup. Im not a power user, so I dont know how to secure it all that well. Security should be on everyone's list. #1 on each in fact. If you want something, turn it on. Forget this open by default, please 0wn me crap.

Three days to get a Win32 box secure? Cmon now, it takes less than an hour (counting the countless reboots) to get the box going as SUPER secure as Win32 can be. To get a reasonably secure system it takes a bit less time than that, but it definitely doesn't take long to make Win32 as secure as it can be. If you want links, we'll post 'em for ya.

Security should be on a lot of people's list as important for their computer. Remember this: security is one of the most important things *nix people look at (the entire UNIX OS is designed in this manner). For Win32, security is definitely lower on the list, simply for convenience and usability.

Remember the mentality of a *nix person vs. Win32 user. *nix IS a secure system, NOT easily touchable by the rest of the world by default. A Win32 user WANTS the system touchable by the rest of the world (its a lot easier to communicate with the local network, peripherals, applications, etc). With the advent of XP, DSL and cable modems, more and more people are beginning to learn that security should be more important that file swapper applications. Linux will see more popularity with people sick of Win32 and are too lazy to learn how to turn things OFF.

Again, its the security of the OS vs. the simplicity of doing things. Win32 is made for everyone to run-n-go. *nix wasn't made with this in mind.

vash

The three day estimate it probably fairly accurate for me. I would have to spend a lot of time searching and reading on Windows security. And then all of the reinstalls and whatnot when I screw up (trust me, Ive done it before ).

Also, I have not found *any* OS (including my beloved OpenBSD) that comes as secure by default as I would like. Its something I wish they would all work on.

Third, I am a bitter, burnt out, tired security professional, so my security rantings can be ignored

 

[vash]

The three day estimate it probably fairly accurate for me. I would have to spend a lot of time searching and reading on Windows security. And then all of the reinstalls and whatnot when I screw up (trust me, Ive done it before ).

Well, it would take me a little bit of time to poke around at all the files to get what I want closed on a debian or gentoo install too. I don't know all the files, but I am pretty sure I know what to edit.

Also, I have not found *any* OS (including my beloved OpenBSD) that comes as secure by default as I would like. Its something I wish they would all work on.

FreeDOS? Mac OS9? I don't know of too many either, but some of the linux distro's for linux users are a bit better (from what I've heard at least).

Third, I am a bitter, burnt out, tired security professional, so my security rantings can be ignored

Since you're a security guy and rant so much, try putting yourself into the shoes of a Win32 program manager that needs to weigh importance of heavy security vs. complete ease of use (for everyone that has problems with a keyboard and mouse). If you can do that, then you know where a majority of Win32 users are coming from.

I didn't want to turn this thread into a *nix vs win32 users. I just wanted everyone to see the merits of both systems when it comes to day-to-day use of the system. Win32 makes it very easy to start and do things. *nix makes it easy to do things, while being secure, but must take time (which people don't care to spend in configuring) and knowledge (which people rarely try to obtain) to accomplish these goals.

vash

 

[TheOmegaCode]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

the collection i have uses whacky MS codec's that barely work in Windows.

A lot of the WMV and WMA files play just fine with mplayer or xine, xine even uses the same win32 dlls as media player.

Actually, I shouldn't have said MS codec's, because I can't even get them to play in Windows Media player. I tried installing the windows codecs, divx for linux and nothing. Well, actually I'll get sound, and then Xine crashes, but no video... Give me time, and I'll figure it out

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Shouldn't the perfect OS be the one that for all intents is invisible to the user?

Yes, but

A) We're nowhere near that with any OS and with hardware and software so widely varying we won't be for a long time, OS X is the closest thing so far
B) It should be extremely verbose when things go wrong so it can actually be diagnosed, unlike Windows or OS X
C) It should be infinitely customizable for those who care to figure it out, sure defaults are good but not everyone wants to use them.

To ask most users to use Linux though, is akin to asking engineers and scientists to perform all mathematical calculations by hand and not use calculators/computers.

Not really, a lot of scientists and engineers use Linux and unix because it does what they need so well.

A, B, and C I agree with totally. I think you misunderstood my point in your second quote though. I meant this: Asking most users to use Linux = asking scientists/engineers **not** to use a calculator or computer aka pen and paper only.

I am quite sure that Linux is used quite extensively by engineers/scientists/etc, but they are far from "most users" and don't belong to that group(although they likely do want the same ease of use when surfing/e-mailing/gaming at home. Anyone who spends their time tweaking Linux to use everything that a regular Windows user does, is an OS Monkey(similar to grease monkies and their blown, Super Charged, Riced out cars ). OS Monkeys are not really intrested in *using* a computer, they get their kicks by making a computer *capable* for use. Live and let live, I'd rather them do that then develop a virus.

 

[Nothinman]

I think you misunderstood my point in your second quote though

No, I didn't misunderstand it, I obviously didn't read the whole thing =) That's what I get for posting from work when I'm actually busy, eh.

Anyone who spends their time tweaking Linux to use everything that a regular Windows user does, is an OS Monkey

I tend to spend less time configuring Linux than I do Windows...

 

[Sunner]

[]Anyone who spends their time tweaking Linux to use everything that a regular Windows user does, is an OS Monkey(similar to grease monkies and their blown, Super Charged, Riced out cars ). OS Monkeys are not really intrested in *using* a computer, they get their kicks by making a computer *capable* for use. Live and let live, I'd rather them do that then develop a virus. [/quote]
Last time I reinstalled my Win2K box at work it ook me quite some time before I could get it working decently close to as good as my Linux box works.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Lint21
Just games. If I could play all my games in Linux with no problem, I'd use it full-time.

Same here.

 

[BFG10K]

You mean it doesnt suck enough for you?

Oh Linux sucks more than enough for me.

Or that the company that doesnt exist that owns it doesnt rip you off every two years or sooner?

I'm not sure what the hell you're talking about but I'm sure your imagination will soon try to explain its reasoning.

Or the fact that there is a choice as to which OS you can use?

If Linux is a real choice and alternative to Windows then why does Windows have a 95% market share? If Linux is so good why aren't people simply wiping their HDs and downloading the free distros?

Or could it be that it's only a valid alternative for elitist pricks who consider themselves above everyone else and lift their noses at everyone using Windows?

Just look at yourself: I made one comment about how essentially I don't like Linux because it's not Windows and you absolutely went beserk about it. Not everyone has the time to read hundreds of sh*tty man pages just to find out how to do simple things like access a floppy disk drive or install a printer. Some of us prefer to get work done rather than proving ourselves to be "better" than the rest of humanity using Windows.

Back your tolling, crap talking comments up with something, stay in GH where there are people that will actually listen to your sorry ass, or STFU. Please.

OK monkey.

 

[Moonbender]

If Linux is a real choice and alternative to Windows then why does Windows have a 95% market share? If Linux is so good why aren't people simply wiping their HDs and downloading the free distros?

Market share is an extremely poor way to measure an applications quality. People don't use the best solution available, they use what they think is the best solution available. That's different in any number of things.

Not that I'd say that Linux is necessarily the best solution available at this point. But I think it's getting there, and I welcome the fact that a free, open-source operating system might be a viable alternative to Microsoft's operating systems.

Edit: If anyone is interested in an impressive example of how easy-to-use Linux can actually be, I really recommend downloading and burning Knoppix. Pop it into the CD-ROM and boot from it, that's all you have to do.
It doesn't install anything on your hard drive, even though it is a full Debian-like Linux distribution, complete with KDE 3, OpenOffice.org, Mozilla, games, and so on and so on. It automatically detects your hardware on boot (no guarantees, obviously, but it found everything in my box, the detection routines are quite good), you can listen to MP3s from your Windows partitions and you can even install and access the Internet - I had my PPPoE running after a couple of minutes. Once again, it does all this without writing anything to your harddrive, no temporary files, no swap file, nothing. Quite a feat, really, I was impressed.

 

[BFG10K]

The second part of the question is still valid: if Linux is so good why aren't people simply wiping their HDs and downloading the free distros?

Linux is free and it's a viable alternative to Windows, right? Then why are the vast majority of people staying with Windows and not touching Linux?

Could it be that these people simply have no need for Linux because Windows does everything they need? Or could it be that Windows is actually better for the vast majority of people?

I'd say yes to both questions.

 

[Moonbender]

Whether or not Linux is "ready for the desktop", that is, a viable alternative is a really complex matter I don't want to go into. I already offered my opinion: Linux is in fact not quite there yet, but there's no reason why it shouldn't be there soon. You seem quite certain of your own position, so I don't see any point in discussing it with you.

Nevertheless, even if Linux was ready for the desktop, and even assuming it's vastly cheaper, more stable, more secure and more efficient, like the Linux advocates say it is, even then Microsoft would still keep a higher market share for quite some time, and even then people wouldn't just start "wiping their HDs" and install it. That's probably due to something you also mention - Windows does everything people need. There's no compelling reason for most people to switch, just like there is no compelling reason for most people to upgrade their hardware more often than every 4 years, just like people didn't convert to CD or DVD within months. That doesn't mean, however, that DVD isn't a more powerful medium than VHS, and that a new CPU isn't faster than an old one. You see what I'm getting at?
Once again, I'm not even starting to argue whether Linux is better or worse or whatever than Windows - this is just to show that you can't deduce an applications quality by its marketshare.

 

[Mucman]

Originally posted by: BFG10K
The second part of the question is still valid: if Linux is so good why aren't people simply wiping their HDs and downloading the free distros?

Linux is free and it's a viable alternative to Windows, right? Then why are the vast majority of people staying with Windows and not touching Linux?

Could it be that these people simply have no need for Linux because Windows does everything they need? Or could it be that Windows is actually better for the vast majority of people?

I'd say yes to both questions.

I would say ignorance is the main issue... My sister in law and my Mom are tired of putting up with some MS OS related issues, and they like how I have my
FreeBSD setup. People use Windows because they don't know there are alternatives. When I tell someone I am running FreeBSD they don't say "oh, and how is it running for you?", they go "WTF is FreeBSD?". Keep in mind my Mom and sister in law are basic users. Primary functions for them are : IM, E-mail, Web-browsing, and card games. They might have some problems with some software, but I don't mind helping if I get to learn more about FreeBSD

 

[MedicBob]

Games and better PnP support.