Linux or Windows

yes, OSes would be less fun without a GUI.

i use the CLI for navigating around the filesystem, making files/folders, editing files, installing/searching/reading about new software, searching, downloading, listening to music, launching programs and lots more.

it's all fairly simple stuff. lots of people use it for alot more then i do. if there's a command i want to use which is hard to remember i make an alias for it, like this -

alias net='watch --interval=2 "sudo netstat -apn -l -A inet"'

the alias is net and the command it runs is what's inbetween the ' ' (from watch to inet). so instead of having to use many third-party programs i can generally just ask someone what the command is then make an alias for it.

the command above shows me everything on the network, it refreshes every 2 seconds

 

It always seemed to me that GUI's were created to make life for the new computer user easier. It's only when you want to start doing crazier things, and doing things faster, that the GUI becomes a pain.
I'm not sure if I'll try it, but I'm curious as to how useful the new MShell (Monad, or Gonad or whatever it's to be called) will be. One of the beautiful things about *nix to me is ssh. I can be logged, rather securely, into a box far away and I don't have to wait fo rthe mouse to catch up to me like with VNC. Just to have that feature makes life so much easier for a SysAdmin. And if you absolutely have to see the target computer's GUI, you can just export it to your box.

 

Win3.1 & then 95 appeared because M$ stole the concept from Apple/MAC.

My outfit was using menu-based CP/M computers long before Windows came along. Those old-time menus were just about as "point- & click" as Win95, but without mouses, icons, or multi-tasking. IOW -- no command line for the everyday user in my outfit.

In any event, I have tried leventy-leven flavors of Linux distros, & all of them used either Gnome GUI, or KDE GUI, or option between the 2 -- even more doofus-friendly than Windoze.

Part of the article linked by BigC reads as follows...

Keep the Linux. Fire the windows developers.

If a person can't program for Linux, he is NOT a full-fledged programmer. Instead he is probably a low level, under paid techie who only understands Dot-Net or some other M$ push-package that masquerades as a programming language but only works with M$ stuff.

As to programming for Linux -- Over & above Assembly language, there are LOTS of higher level languages for Linux including but not limited to PERL, IsForth, Objective Caml, Java, Emu, C, GNU Pascal, OpenC++.

Any programmer who deserves to be called a "programmer" can program Linux using a higher level language. Such languages are written precisely for the purpose that programmers can primarily concentrate on the program's logic, largely independent of which machine or which OS is going to execute that program.

(Rendering a high-level-language encoded program into an OS-specific executable is mainly (not solely) the job of the language's compiler when it compiles the program.)

 

I started in computers in the 70s and really got going in the 80s, back then it was 'Disk Operating System(DOS) and Unix and Linux is far easier than typing those commands although I loved my DOS machines. I dont think I was ever tired of the commands it was just a pain in the a*** if you got it wrong the first time, but you could always copy it again and I find now I still navigate around very quickly but that all stems from my past I suppose.

Linux has been around awhile now and has grabbed a market share so I've read, okay I dont think it is just for the geek squad anymore like in the beginning and users SHOULD wave the Linux flag and get it noticed although today anyone involved in computers must have heard of linux - M$ tries to convince us that their product is the ONLY one to have. Like I've said before I just play, but when I see the things I've read I just want to wave the Linux banner! Yes M$ deserves to be where they are and hey they have worked hard for it. The microsoft model is far different from Linux, from the top down. M$ has Bill, Linux has Linus...you know Linus, Linus Torvalds - and there the prob starts right at the top. By the definition of the Linux model there is not really a figure head/spokesman and we all love one good or bad - and whether it is good or bad publicity IS publicity. Bill is known, dosent matter hes stepped down, he has an image by those of us that evaluate the product or those of us that have never touched a computer a very strong image that sells.

I dont want to make this a long boring post, but bear with me a while longer and I will make just a few points why I think people do not adopt Linux.

People think Linux is too diverse. I agree to a point. The three I'm sure you have heard of are SuSE, Ubuntu and Red Hat and going by my articles the manufacturers would like some sort of unification before shipping mainstream.

Linux doesnt have enough applications. Well thats one of the main ones pushed out now and again by people who know nothing of the os. There are desent apps as good as anything else you could get.

Linux has issues. Another one thats put about. Well so does any other os and I know of no bad os/hardware issue at the moment.

No Support. Linux IS easy just put in the time and theres help around for the enthusiast and proper support.

Finally, if I was only allowed one comment it would be this, there is NO disadvantage with Linux compared to Microsoft.

 

Linux has both CLI and GUI. In Ubuntu you don't need to use the CLI but it's nice that it's there for old timers like myself. I learned to program on UNIX (Apollo Domain) and used to earn a living developing on Apollo, SunOS, and Solaris. So I find Linux very familiar and easy to use. Some driver issues can grind you down and are a pain. It reminds me of OS/2, great OS (for it's day) but poor device support.

I can get all my kit working on Linux but I don't get all the features from my printer which is a shame.

Personally if I wasn't a gamer then I'd be on Linux 24x7. That said I can play Doom3 and UT2004 native on Linux and with some effort Steam will work (under WINE).

So ultimately Windows has more applications and makes life a little easier. I can't live without EAC and Foobar I also miss the extra mouse button navigation in Firefox under Linux. I've tried but never got it to work.

It would be nice if there were more applications on Linux but sadly some of the best (free) apps are on Windows.

Fairy

PS- every time I see a LINUX screen shot I am tempted to go back to Ubuntu (or maybe Xubuntu which looks even more like my kind of Linux). I could always move my printer onto my Win2k3 server

 

Well - did you read one of the links provided in dog's posting https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=799198&postcount=10 ?
After doing this the answer should be quite obvious - at least from a security standpoint.

 

an interesting read about the security of linux http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3601946

 

Rather a bold statement isn't it?
In other words; we are stupid and need every bit of help we can get from all those nasty attacks with malware on our linux-install,with the help of Kapersky of course.
He should have said; "if it isn't windows we can't make a profit on it".

If you want to sell a product you better not insult your potential customers.
He should have checked with his PR-department first, before opening his mouth.

Lamehand

 

Just a minor correction it wasn't Shane Coursen from KAV US that made that statement it was Tom Ferris, researcher with Security Protocols.

 

Thanks for the correction dog, it must be the heat over here that warped my brain.
The point i tried to make is that this has nothing to do with security but all with marketing.

Lamehand

 

NP ~It's been too hot here too ~

You're right as with always, marketing is everything --- if there isn't a market -> create one.

Call me Steve my friend

 

Ok, Steve it is, i am called after that famous president of the USA; Abraham Lincoln, but Abe for short of course.

 

Hello,
And I am called after the father of that viking that conquered Kiev, back in early 12th or 13th century ... Can you guess it ...?
Mrk

 

May we call you Father Viking?

 

Thanks BigC.
Great posts by the way Steve.

There is a point to security through obscurity not being the path to security, but it is better to build your security strategy on a solid foundation rather than quicksand. I think people who move to Linux move there for a reason. They are looking for something better and safer. It is either inherently safer or it isn't. Whether it is better is subjective.

If Kapersky would spend more time expanding their Linux product line and less time spreading the FUD, I would consider them for my Linux AV purchase. Right now it seems like they have a big axe to grind. I think there is a place for security products in Linux, but companies and "independent" research firms should be honest and fair about it.

It is difficult to sort out the real truth in all these "expert" reports when all that matters is market share on both sides.

 

One more thing... Cheaper! No longer is software designated a ridiculous price. Spend more money on hardware? Maybe even friends and family. :O

 

I still haven't used it! I'm still letting you guys work the bugs out! I am surprised how seldom we hear about the performance issues. Could it be that XP is more efficient than one might have guessed - That is to say when you are in an application, maybe the inefficiency of the XP is not such a big issue.

In other words, can I make music CD's faster? Can I access files faster? download faster? There has got to be differences in the internet experience - Theoretically browsing would be quicker without as much security hassles, but maybe not?

I don't want to hear about what I can't do in Linux. Think about it! Does anyone beleive that once they use Linux they are prohibited from still using windows? I want to here about what I can do in Linux that I cannot do now in XP, or is it just the "feel", which is a legitimate reason. I've said it before, but the "feel" of iTunes is so much better that I will probably never use Windows Media Player for music again. WMP actually has more capability, I think, but it is not a lot of fun and it is actually much harder to get a good result from.


HandsOff

 

Basically, anything you can do with windows, you can do with linux aswell, but that is not the main reason to use it, at least not for me.
It's open source, that means that you, the user, has control over the OS and not the other way around and performance is not an issue, it's fast, very fast.
On the subject of MP3 players and all those other multimedia gadgets i can not comment because i don't use them, i even kicked flash off my systems, there are other people here who can tell you more about that.

HandsOff just get a liveCD and try it yourself,nothing will be installed on your machine if you don't want that, but you'll be able to play around with it and see for yourself.

Lamehand

 

I can't say I've experienced crashes while using Windows XP. In the days when I used Windows 98, and 95 before it, BSODs were fairly common.

 

You are right lamehand!

I've actually been wanting to get a separate computer, one for each o/s because that way I could optimize each system along a division of tasks. It's the only direction I see for someone who wants everything, and wants to be streamlined at the same time!

One thing we haven't mentioned much is planned obsolescence, and planned dependence. It's been along since Microsoft picked up Giant and RAV (was it?). Do they have any commercial offerings yet? I sure don't want to miss the launch of the security products that will owe their success to incompetence of the parent company! I can see the add campaign now: "...and as long as we continued doing the same things that we've been doing, you definitely need our security offerings. Even then we cannot promise a safe computing experience..."and what a strong position there for a support for a fee department will have. First convince the customer the problem is with the o/s, and when you've finished bleeding the poor sucker, tell him the problem is with the security program, and hang up and pick up the other line when it rings and then start the meter running again!


-HandsOff

 

I myself using dual boot with Windows XP and Gentoo Linux. I only boot to XP if i want to play game and the rest i work in Gentoo Linux. I myself was a noob before i try Gentoo after reading a lot of documentation now i got no problem setting up Gentoo and upgrading the kernel, and very happy Linux user now.

 

No the burn speed is set by the capabilities of your burner and media

Most definitely besides not running a wack of real time monitors ... Linux/unix is more effeicent

No ... your max bandwidth is set by your ISP

Maybe slightly ... if your Windows AV is scanning web traffic but I doubt it'd really be measurable (if you're running several resident shields (AV/AT/AS) it may be more noticable - otherwise no. Web filtering (ie. proxomitron, privoxy etc.) will slow it down slightly of course as it processes the data ... but it isn't really noticable either.

 

Dog-

Thanks for the input. Rumor has it you are very familiar with the the pro's and con's of different Linux approaches. I'm getting more and more concerned about the windows filing system because of the fact that we cannot see all of the files, and we cant see all of the links, and I am sure I am doing things very innefficently, but what can I do? I can't take into account things that I cannot see!

When I get a chance I will try find more out, but that's another story!


- HandsOff