Topic: Why Linux is better

[Nemesis]

Link to site

Enter the chocolate factory

[/color]

I guess people won't switch to Linux because it's free (as in free speech, they probably don't care) or because it's free (as in free beer, they probably think they didn't pay for Windows), but because they see new, great features that Windows doesn't have. So here are a few reasons why Linux rocks!

Oh, and before that, if you're already a Linux geek, you might want to read this FAQ.

[Sirgod]

I subscribed a few weeks ago to this news magizine, NetWork World, because of you Nemesis, ( I didn't feel l337) , anyway they had a huge article yesterday, about how RedHat is outsourcing alot of there development work. But It opens up the door for other builds.

I'll see IF I can find the online version later.

Stephen

PS. Have you read about the Open Source Beer?

[Nemesis]

I subscribed a few weeks ago to this news magizine, NetWork World, because of you Nemesis, ( I didn't feel l337) , anyway they had a huge article yesterday, about how RedHat is outsourcing alot of there development work. But It opens up the door for other builds.

I'll see IF I can find the online version later.

Stephen

Yet another one seduced into joining the rebellion.  Maybe not yet a rebel but at least a sympathizer.  Vader Gates must feel the source trembling . 

Is this it?  NetWork World.  I don't recall having seen it.  I'll take a look at it this weekend.  Might be interesting.

Maybe we need a tech related News site list .

PS. Have you read about the Open Source Beer?

I've heard of it but since I don't drink and find the smell of beer rather distasteful i haven't really looked into it. 

[Sirgod]

Yeah that's it. They where running a poll about 6 weeks ago on IT guys, and If you filled it out for an article in there magizine, they'd send you a free subscription. I'll see if I can't find the link again, so you can get it set up.

One of the cartoons dealt with someone worrying about Privacy issues, not knowing if there phones where being recorded etc. and a Guy from HP walks by muttering "I know what you mean".

Stephen

[Commander Maxillius]

"Vader" Gates could be more accurately called "Anakin".  He's been recorded saying he thinks Linux is superior to Windows.  He doesn't like where those two morons are taking his company.  That's why he quit.  Gates was talking about the WGA.

[Just plain old Punisher]

Like that geek in the back of the class, Linux just tries too hard.

Look at me! I'm linux! Don't forget me! I'm free! Remember that! And I don't have viruses, and stuff. No one mentions the fact that it's not due to the fact that the OS is super secure or anything, it's really due to the fact that no one bothers to write viruses in Linux or Mac OS.

[Sirgod]

Eletist Bastards... 

[Nemesis]

"Vader" Gates could be more accurately called "Anakin".  He's been recorded saying he thinks Linux is superior to Windows.  He doesn't like where those two morons are taking his company.  That's why he quit.  Gates was talking about the WGA.

I've never seen any such reports of Gates saying such things, do you have a link?  As to quitting he is staying on as chairman of the board.  Ballmer is his close long term personal friend.

If he really believes those things he should use his position as the biggest stockholder to oust those board members responsible for the illegal corporate activities and if he can't get the support to do so then SELL his stock and invest in more ethical companies.  Even use his money to fight the company in court when it breaks the law.

[Nemesis]

No one mentions the fact that it's not due to the fact that the OS is super secure or anything, it's really due to the fact that no one bothers to write viruses in Linux or Mac OS.

Wrong Pun.

Which type of server gets attacked by automated attacks?  Windows.  Linux is quite strong in the server area but it is Windows that gets the attacks, why?  Because Windows was designed from the beginning without security and recently has had attempts to bolt it on.  Linux (modeled on Unix) was designed from the beginning with a connected to the world mentality with security built into the core.

Add to this that Microsoft integrates things into Windows for marketing reasons not technical reasons.  Linux does not.  Linux leaves things separate that are separate.  Why is Windows Messenger not an uninstallable separate program?  How about IE?  Mediaplayer?  The whole windowing environment?  Marketing.  By integrating the way they do they make security flaws in the integrated software flaws for the underlying OS as they run with the maximum security clearance.  Linux avoids that way of doing things and thereby avoids those security flaws.

Windows security gets fixed when Microsoft sees a profit in it.

Linux security gets fixed because those creating it USE it and want/need it to be secure NOW. 

The same "no one uses it" excuse was used with Firefox and it was predicted that if and when Firefox exceeded 10% market share (as it has) it would be attacked constantly and would be no more secure.  It has exceeded that share yet does not get the attacks as it has fewer security defects and they get fixed rapidly as discovered.

There are many out there who make viruses for the reputation it gives their alter ego in the cracker¹ world.  If they could be the first one to bring a major virus attack to Linux they would do so for the reputation, but they can't.

¹ - Crackers are often called hackers but the major difference is that hackers build while crackers attack and destroy.  Bill Gates started as a hacker.  (No he did not become a cracker he merely ceased to hack).

[Nemesis]

Eletist Bastards... 

What is the key difference between the Microsoft mentality and the Open Source mentality?









Microsoft wants to be the only one, for wealth, power and control.  Open Source wants to be the best.

[Just plain old Punisher]

No one mentions the fact that it's not due to the fact that the OS is super secure or anything, it's really due to the fact that no one bothers to write viruses in Linux or Mac OS.

Wrong Pun.

Which type of server gets attacked by automated attacks?  Windows.  Linux is quite strong in the server area but it is Windows that gets the attacks, why?  Because Windows was designed from the beginning without security and recently has had attempts to bolt it on.  Linux (modeled on Unix) was designed from the beginning with a connected to the world mentality with security built into the core.

Add to this that Microsoft integrates things into Windows for marketing reasons not technical reasons.  Linux does not.  Linux leaves things separate that are separate.  Why is Windows Messenger not an uninstallable separate program?  How about IE?  Mediaplayer?  The whole windowing environment?  Marketing.  By integrating the way they do they make security flaws in the integrated software flaws for the underlying OS as they run with the maximum security clearance.  Linux avoids that way of doing things and thereby avoids those security flaws.

Windows security gets fixed when Microsoft sees a profit in it.

Linux security gets fixed because those creating it USE it and want/need it to be secure NOW. 

The same "no one uses it" excuse was used with Firefox and it was predicted that if and when Firefox exceeded 10% market share (as it has) it would be attacked constantly and would be no more secure.  It has exceeded that share yet does not get the attacks as it has fewer security defects and they get fixed rapidly as discovered.

There are many out there who make viruses for the reputation it gives their alter ego in the cracker¹ world.  If they could be the first one to bring a major virus attack to Linux they would do so for the reputation, but they can't.

¹ - Crackers are often called hackers but the major difference is that hackers build while crackers attack and destroy.  Bill Gates started as a hacker.  (No he did not become a cracker he merely ceased to hack).

They can't do a major linux virus attack because it probably wouldn't spread due to the fact that linux makes up a small percentage of the users. A virus isn't impossible in any OS, Malacious code is possible in ANY os.

[Nemesis]

They can't do a major linux virus attack because it probably wouldn't spread due to the fact that linux makes up a small percentage of the users. A virus isn't impossible in any OS, Malacious code is possible in ANY os.

You ignored the point about automated attacks on Windows servers and not on Linux servers even though in the server business Linux is a major player.  So why is it that Linux servers are virtually ignored when it comes to attacks and Windows servers are not? 

The Russian anti virus firm Kaspersky has been claiming for years that Linux is popular enough and the wave of viruses equal to what Windows faces is just about to begin.  It is 5 years since they proclaimed those attacks were about to arrive any day and we are still waiting.  We are waiting because it is harder and Linux is patched quicker making any breaches a much more temporary thing.

Linux servers have been attacked - successfully.  I don't claim they have perfect security - just better security.  If I recall correctly the Debian servers were breached once.  The difference is between a hacker directly attacking the Linux server and automated tools autonomously attacking ranges of Windows servers.

So why is it that the forecasts by pro Microsoft people that Firefox (as mentioned earlier) would be just as badly compromised as IE once it reached a 10% market share have not been lived up to even though Firefox exceeded that 10% some time ago?   Could it be that Firefox by virtue of NOT being integrated into the core of the OS does not have the same potential for a determined hacker to take over the system?  Could it be that without the ActiveX security mess Firefox is less vulnerable?  Could it be that Firefox is patched promptly with no regard to marketing schedules? 

Microsoft needs to go back to the non integrated model of the OE on top of the OS running programs.  That way you need to breach multiple levels to get to root (admin) access.  Also killing off ActiveX would go a long way to help.  Not running code clicked on without explicit permission from the user, none of this "You opened the E-Mail" so the attached code runs even though it was "misidentified" as an image.

Beware the monoculture it is dangerous.