Computer Security Environment

This thread's topic is ridiculous.

Notok, your last off-topic post, however, was right on.

 

A note: more buyers, more jobs for assistance. Your point is still valid in the sense of are they prepared? It's an open question, i don't think you or i are qualified to answer.
I would add another: not only Ubuntu is "userfriendly". At least 3 distributions are ready, that i know of. So this isn't about a shift to one distro, one company, but several. Not a shift in MONOPOLIES.

I agree with you that everyone should be able to use the computer. That's why:

Short sighted companies that only build for Windows should open their eyes and provide support for alternatives- Microsoft WILL go for their markets as soon as it shows good profit margins; that way the biggest advantage Windows has would go away (those programs/games that only run in it)

Manufacturers should provide a choice for pre-installed GNU/Linux or Windows.

 

People would learn to use google, forums, mailling lists, irc to fix linux, there would be no need for helpdesk call centers specifically for distros.
Businesses can already get *Nix support staff who may utilise their own helpdesk, but when *Nix support get stuck they use google, forums, mailling list, irx ...

Mainstream is very different to Niche and Linux has been 100% niche for a longtime and only recently becoming mainstream.
There is no reason why Ubuntu could become the next Windows and we STILL have all the other distro's about, because they are all niche products.

Linux is configured far better than windows for security by default. If you apply limited user accounts and remove everyone permissions and a few system policies, you can prevent a huge amount of malware being able to do damage.
The other main reason is better code quality. Not just in the time to fix bugs, but the fact that due to the open sourceness and continous evolution of the kernel, which itself was based on a mature design (unix), whereas the windows nt platform has little hertige and has no way near developed at the pace linux has.

 

Hi Guys,

Just a question, (I honestly don't know), but with an open source wouldn't it be much easier for a bad guy, to modify install malware, & release. Being open couldn't almost anyone add a backdoor?

Nick - Would be very nice to do away with tech support, I guess that could only happen with open source apps.. Geez! Apple is up to $49.00 per incident phone support.

Take Care
Rico

 

As I mentioned earlier, within our supposed scenario that say Linux becomes popularized to the extent that Microsoft is today, the user base would consist largely of the same computer illiterate masses that make up the Microsoft user base today. The vast majority of those users are unable or unwilling to use the aforementioned methods to diagnose and resolve software problems themselves.

Not sure what you mean here. Perhaps you could clarify and elaborate on this a bit. Remember, we are using the hypothetical situation, of say Linux becoming market leader, to test the notion I've repeated throughout this thread. This in turn will provide a more thorough understanding of the the computer security environment within the context of the software market in general and the operating system market in particular.

 

It's the same thing with any download. You have to trust the source.
In free software case, you have repositories, trusted ones. Anything outside is the same with any software. IMO

 

I agree with you. I think both could happen, Red Hat Desktop 2015 could be the paid supported Fedora Core 19 would be the free unsupported.

Linux comes in many flavours, free, costly, fast, bleeding edge, dumbed down, complex etc.

One distro could become a Market leader, but it would be hard to group them all into one boat.

What I mean is its possible for one distro to become the next windows, that is, popular, bloated, insecure config, various vectors of exploit that dont exist in other distros AND still have lots of other distros about that are not.

There is also another issue.

If Brand X distro is good but flawed in one way, due to freedom, someone can grab that source, improve it and rebrand it and sell it as brand y. Give it some advertising undercut in £££/$$$, state its 100% compatible and it could easily become more popular (as happened with IBM PC vs the compatible clones).

 

Yes, but there also far more people able to fix the problem (compared to closed source) - its far harder to give the code away without it passing under a programmers eyes due to having to supply the source.

Thats the thing with linux, there is that choice already !!!!!!!!!!!!

E.g. Pay for Supported Redhat, or get Centos which is 100% functionaly the same code (minux branding) and free, but the only support is community support.
One is more popular with Big businesses, the other is more popular with small businesses and home/non-profit users.