Following on from the win xp bug that allowed remote execution..

[dennis]

Balls, its you that wants it all to be linux when it isn't.

Not if its on freebsd it isn't. And its all open source.

>

[T i m]

Even the goD for the Linux zealots says so:

Yup.

Yup.

Yup.

Yup.

The problem is 'most' people don't pay for a Windows licence as such in the same way they don't choose the make of tyres that come on their car. In fact they don't even separate the hardware from the OS or the software for that matter. 'My laptop is broken' could mean anything from the PSU isn't working to the OS won't boot to they can't get on the Internet or they can't get to a particular Facebook page.

That's most things then right? ;-)

To be fair there are some good 'Mac only' apps and the Apple hardware can be pretty good (my second hand Mac Mini has done ok so far).

(I have actually sent a print job though Octoprint but aren't fully familiar with all it's features as yet).

Sure ... I'm quite happy having Linux in my TV or Nas or Router because I don't have to interface with it directly, specifically at the CLI. Android uses the Linux kernel but luckily for billions of Android users they can just use their phones or tablets without knowing that.

Such as?

In an ideal world we (the ordinary appliance user) wouldn't even see the OS, let alone have to deal with it or worse, be forced to 'learn it', just to be able to use it!

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

A tiny minority of sad geeks and nerds obviously, as we have already seen in this thread!

Don't mention 'graphics' in front of the Linux nerds ... that is yet another sore point for them (and will probably go on a rant about it's the graphics chip / card manufacturers fault for not supporting Linux, not that Linux is wholly unappealing to many of them for a whole raft of reasons.

Steam box anyone? ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

Yup, that's a biggie here as well, along with the real Forte Agent.

Whilst I have run some stuff under WINE (even stuff like Teamviewer, although some Linux users didn't realise that) if there isn't some killer reason to run Linux or not run Windows, I'm not sure I see the point?

There are loads of little things like that that eventually make one question why they are even bothering. Imagine trying to justify them to someone who really has no specific interest in running Linux but you are trying to show how good it is?

Yup. Still can't see the point. ;-) And what of all the other apps that 'sort of' run via WINE but don't really in any clean way.

Neat. ;-)

Yup ... and often also open source and freeware ... and if Open Source there are even *more* eyes looking though the code. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Clive George escribió:

He's escaped my killfile. His original post was a rather obvious and tedious anti-linux troll.

And this news just out:

let's see how quickly MS fixes that.

Agreed. You'll have seen I said earlier that an OS is a tool and I find advocacy wars boring.

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Vir Campestris escribió:

Let's see how quickly they fix this one, then.

[dennis]

Its already fixed in most cases because the majority of windows users don't execute programs from servers.

Its the business world where they might have diskless clients that are vulnerable.

The real question is how are they modifying it on the fly and what detects the modifying software?

Its been talked about before. Its similar to the way you can modify a compiler to put code in as it compiles. They can identify when you are compiling the compiler so the code to do it doesn't need to be in the source that other user compile so they think they are safe.

So why do you keep doing it?

[dennis]

There is plenty of stuff that could run better under a unix system than under windows desktop. However that stuff isn't what you would normally run on a windows desktop. I don't really understand why linux fanatics want everyone to run linux on all desktop machines other than that they hate M$. Linux has plenty of share in the markets where Unix systems work well.

There is no way its going on my laptop again as it doesn't..

have a driver for my printer and I am not buying a new one. doesn't work with my document scanner anywhere near as well as paperport. doesn't support RAW files properly from either my olympus, my daughters sony or my wifes panasonic cameras. I like outlook and there isn't a linux equivilant.

However I do run it on various other headless computers my phone my tablet my NAS servers, probably on my TV (I haven't checked).

The whole argument over which OS you run is rubbish.

What I object to is these people that keep on about windows bugs when their favorit OS has similar bugs that they just gloss over and try to convince others they don't exist.

Anyway stop arguing with TNP and tomlinson as they are insignificant.

[Martin Barclay]

I didn't see him. Did he nymshift?

From what I saw in the Linux groups, I would agree. His mission also seemed to be to spread FUD about Linux.

[T i m]

I'm sure there is ... it's just getting '*nix' optimised to the diversity of hardware (especially graphics) that seems to be the problem in the real world. But it's hardly surprising this is the case though, with a vast majority of the PC games being developed for Windows or fine tuned for it and so Linux has to play catchup. This is exactly what Linus himself has admitted is an issue or Linux and it trying to deal with loads of different hardware.

From a practical POV, I have had many instances where accepting the 'Recommended' driver in the Hardware Driers applet on Linux, then renders the box unusable. And unlike Windows where Safe Mode is pretty predictable so I can get back into the system using a GUI to fix it, Linux often requires one to learn / use lots of CLI type incantations and I really don't have time (or interest) for all that (so often re-install Linux and just don't touch the graphics drivers again). ;-)

For most people I'm sure that is true.

It really seems to be they have pseudo political, religious, anti-corporate attitudes and issues with anything that isn't *nix, a level of attention / attitude that is totally missing from 99% of ordinary desktop OS users.

But than I guess that is the difference between any of us who just use stuff, only getting involved in something when 'needs must' and those who have an interest in something for interests sake.

Of course. No one (especially me) has denied that *nix ideal in loads of places and in most of those cases it's ideally suited, if not for any other reason in many cases because it's free and does what is required.

And that can just be down to that laptop and the combination of hardware and whatever version of Linux (kernel), distro, version, DE and apps you use on it.

I have a Compaq laptop round Mums and I was using it last night. The first thing I did when booting it into Mint was do the updates. The first batch seemed to crash (couldn't find this or that) I refresh the updater and ran it again and this time it did a batch. Then I launched Pan and made a couple of posts. Then I rebooted into Windows, did some stuff in that and then back into Mint. This time, when I tried to launch Pan, nothing happened. I tried again, same result. I tried again, from the menu, still nothing. I launched Firefox and that started ok so I closed it again. Then I tried Pan again and this time it came up ... and then it came up several times, in fact all the times I had tried to start it from probably a good 60 seconds earlier. Then, as I was trying to close them down they were crashing and offering me to Force Quit (I took a picture of it doing that as the Linux zealots don't believe it ever happens).

This is the thing ... whilst there are some programs that are very cross platform (like Thunderbird or Firefox) even they will have differences between the Windows and Linux versions, often making the Linux version less flexible (and the version in the repo older).

Me too, mainly Raspberry Pis (Domoticx, Dymo Print Server, OMV).

Well, if you have an Android phone the chances are you are only running the Linux kernel (on a pretty fixed set of hardware) and C and Java on top. Hardly GNU/Linux as we know it and has as much in common with a Linux desktop OS as it does my TV or router.

Of course. Because that is often a personal preference, along with what car you drive or what food you like, or and more commonly, something that should be transparent in the first place. You can often see the difference between those using say a Linux OS as a tool versus those who also use it as a hobby and that's if the have the boot preferences set to show a splash screen or all the modules loading. ;-)

I can see how they get as fanatical and excited as they do though. Imagine being so 'into' something that the vast majority of the population have never even heard of, even if they use it every day in embedded appliances etc. Imagine trying to promote and advocate something that they feel is better for them so should be better for everyone, and have most people ignore them? I know what this feels like because I have done and often still do, when I really think it would be a good fit. To this extent I think there are probably now about 5 people who use Linux as their main / daily desktop, directly thanks to me (because I told them about it and installed it for them for free) but they all only really use their machines for WP and a bit of web browsing. They are also all dual boot with Windows for those 'must have' apps and utilities they need to use now and again and they wouldn't have been able to use just Linux, had it been the choice of one OR the other.

I would like to think that I was discussing stuff with TNP as I think there is still some hope there (and there are glimpses of honesty that peeks though the frustration and red mist). That other thing I just laugh at (and the more he stalks me the more I laugh) and would personally use the term irrelevant over insignificant (although they are both valid). ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

Aww look, poor Martin can't even track who is talking about whom. No wonder he can't get his facts right about anything else!

Cheers, T i m

[Mike Tomlinson]

En el artículo , Martin Barclay escribió:

Just to be clear, it's dennis I'm referring to, not D i m .

D i m is killfiled until the heat death of the universe. The usenet equivalent of the loud-mouthed know-all armchair-warrior bore you'll find in any pub who thinks he has an absolute right to be heard. He needs to read this:

I wonder why. What's the point? Some sad people out there, for sure.

[Martin Barclay]

Ah, I see.

Excellent, I like that! Bookmarked.

[Jethro_uk]

When people bang on too much about any particular OS/Softwares security, the best way to shut them up is to ask if they have baked their own silicon.

It makes not a jot *how* "secure" software is, if the CPU you are running on has a weakness. Designed or discovered.

The lack of an open-source chip design means you can *never* be 100% certain of security if you are using Other Peoples Chips.

And even if Intel/ARM/Qualkcomm were to release the masks of their products: (a) how could you be sure it's what you have in that packaging, and (b) who is capable of mapping it to an instruction set and operation manual ?>

[The Natural Philosopher]

That depends on how stupid you are.

Hint: the whole point of an operating system is to sit between what (ab)users do, and the hardware.

Complete tosh.

Bit like saying crash protection and rollover bars wont hep if you have suspension failure.

People who debug software are for a start.

If a certain sequence of opcodes causes your entire filesystem to be dumped to an NSA server, I think people would notice.

That is after all how we detect malware of any sort, be in application, OS, firmware or hardware.

People actually look at packet streams to see what is happening: if your hardware is connecting to places it shouldn't, its very detectable.

I do like your vision of computer security. There is a builtin hole in the floor of your building connected to a secret tunnel, and you simply cant understand why the silver goes missing and where the miuddy footprints come from,. since all locks appear to be intact.

I hope people realise how unemployable you are.

[Huge]

[27 lines snipped]

Unix based systems can be clients or servers - the distinction is a meaningless one introduced by those with Microsoft electrodes in their heads.

[Huge]

None of which are needed on Linux.

[30 lines snipped]

[dennis]

You have never microcoded a CPU have you? Hint you can do stuff without the OS being involved at all. Remember I was involved in designing CPUs and you don't understand what can and can't be done.

Yes dear, if you say so it must be true.

Why use an analogy that has nothing to do with what was said? Trying to score points again?

I doubt that very much. As long as it executes the instructions they give it and get the results they expect they are not going to see what else it does.

How would you notice? Do you monitor your net traffic with an analyser all the time? The OS wouldn't notice if it were done.

Some people might but there are ways that even you couldn't look for. Why do you think the military have tempested rooms, they know ways to do it and know of ways to make it more difficult.

When did you last check there is no spread spectrum radio hidden in your computer chip set? That would be a hole that you would have some difficulty in detecting. Not that it would be worth using it on you and they would keep it for use on someone of significance. A bit like they have with the leaks being published ATM.

[Huge]

Why? There are better tools on Linux.

[The Natural Philosopher]

No. it isn't. Th distinction is in fact that Microsoft started uits network paradigm on a 'share amongst peers' paradigm. So server and client are inextricably linked.,

That's not so on OSX or on Linux. On Linux you can run the client, or the server, or both, or neither.