Slashdot Mirror
Why Desktop Linux Hasn't Taken Off
alphadogg writes "It's free, easier to use than ever, IT staffers know it and love it, and it has fewer viruses and Trojans than Windows. So, why hasn't Linux on the desktop taken off? When it comes to desktop Linux, the cost savings turn out to be problematic, there are management issues, and compatibility remains an issue. 'We get a lot more questions about switching to Macs than switching to Linux at this point, even though Macs are more expensive,' one Gartner analyst says."
How I am even supposed to begin to recommend Linux for the average user when there are 100 different distros, each with its own quirks and issues? Hell, even I don't have any clue where to begin on which one to recommend. And I sure wouldn't know how to support each one if they had problems.
At least with Windows, I can say "Use Home Premium at home, Professional at work." Even simpler with Macs. With Linux, I guess I would recommend Ubuntu, but a lot of Linux fans are even starting to bitch about that.
If you want simple users, make it simple to use. Linux is way too fractured right now for the average user. Get a consensus down to a single home distro, a single business distro, and a few specialized distros and then start from there.
It would probably also help if you could get Linux users to stop fighting amongst themselves over every little goddamn thing. Outsiders are really turned off by what looks like a bunch of squabbling geeks fighting over their favorite Star Trek series (which we all know is DS9, anyway). Average consumers *do not* like stepping into the middle of a fight which they don't even understand. That's one of the reasons they like Windows and OS X (all the fighting over those is kept behind the scenes, for the most part).
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
What is required is legislation that a common execution runtime exist on all Operating Systems. Write once, run anywhere. This will end OS monopolies.
Very powerful, virtually nonexistant for Linux on the desktop.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Let's talk about Gnome 3, Gnome 'Classic', Unity, KDE, XFce, Enlightenment, and so on, and then see why Linux hasn't taken off on the desktop.
And does the desktop matter outside the office any more when you have tablet-style UIs?
Microsoft Office
simple...
Games!
Get the games companies to release Linux version of their big titles (Modern Warfare series, Elder Scrolls series etc... etc...)
and you'll see more and more Linux desktops!!
Well that and AMD / Nvidia get around to shipping bug free drivers that is.. ^_~ lol
Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
It's an application compatibility issue at the moment. Just about everything I use is browser based these days except photoshop. If I could pay a subscription to something like onlive.com for remote photoshop access, my next laptop wouldn't be a mac.
Maybe it has taken off and all this talk of it not taking off is just evidence of it having taken off?
Do you inspect a roller coaster everytime you ride it?
I work for a software company whose product line is based on linux & linux-like OS. The managers in our group are extremely hostile to linux and harass staff if they use anything other than microsoft windows. It doesn't help that many of these managers are former microsoft employees but basically they fear it because they don't know it and are way too lazy to learn anything new.
Why do we keep getting these posts that are deliberately chosen to incite flamewars between pro- and anti-Linux people?
Do we need to have more unhelpful arguments like the one yesterday when Samzenpus posted a dupe of a response to a dupe from back at the start of the year?
Because Gartner analysts aren't paid to think analytically. They're paid to spout nonsense droll in order to bulk up readership and subscriptions to their out-of-date information.
Linux _is_ on the desktop. It's in more places than "they" think.
Is it ever going to "iPad" everything else out the door? No, because people actually like choices, and they're going to
choose the platform that makes it the easiest to do the job they have to do.
That's why my desktop is linux, and my corporate windows image is run in a VM.
Maybe we need to plan a "year of the Linux desktop" to get people to migrate...
....confusing, non-intuitive, and not compatible with most all games and apps.
Here are some more reasons why non tech masses haven't picked linux yet
http://qubitlogic.com/2012/04/why-this-is-not-the-year-of-desktop-linux/
I happen to like Linux (run Oscelet 64-bit on a VM) but I'm pretty technically minded. The problem is partly advertising (or lack of it). The other issue is not too many novice users would like to go to the terminal and type sudo {whatever} to install things. The newer versions have helped eliminate this, but I still have to occasion do just that for some things. I do, unlike many other Linux users from some of the reviews I've seen, like Unity since it very much mimics Windows Start menu in that you can type something in the box and it pops up various options; like the quick launch bar too. Still, it's the intimidation factor along with lack of advertisment that's killing Linux imo. :)
Most people do not know there is an alternative to windows or that it's as good as windows. Other issues confusion and people trying to fix things that are not broken such as completely redoing gnome in gnome 3 or brain dead things like Unity in Ubuntu which cause Mint to over take it as the most downloaded distro. Android is a good example of what can happen when people are exposed to an alternative OS. It's now the number 1 smart phone OS and Windows phone is more or less a flop.
Because of "Gnome 3"
Linux is too fragmented. It needs to have one standard library framework for coding against which includes the GUI, audio and other input/output methods. It also needs to have a standard framework for encoding/decoding compressed audio/video.
Open source does not have to be "free" as in beer.
hasn't been released yet. Playing with W8 pushed me to look seriously into Linux alternatives. (#! and Linux Mint) Valve should release Steam for Linux this year. Gabe Newell trashes Win8/Linux client near: http://techland.time.com/2012/04/25/steam-native-linux-client-near-gabe-newell-trashes-windows-8/
I just can't understand why that isn't me!
I've heard this argument so many times, I think it's posted a dozen times a year. I'm sure everyone knows why Linux isn't popular, we live in a Windows World! If the poster doesn't know this by now, he must be brand new to computers!
-- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
Seriously, Who cares? My year of the Linux desktop came in '92 even though I was born in '93! I use Linux religiously and will evangelize it to anyone willing to listen to my gospel. But so what if Linux doesn't ever get mainstream. If people would rather use Windoz or Mac, it's their God given right!
At work, I write code that has to run on Windows (multiple versions, multiple bitness), Linux x86-64, and Solaris SPARC 64. Maintaining compatibility across multiple versions of Windows and Visual Studio is trivial compared to Linux. Worse, GUI applications have more complex code execution paths that, under Windows, can be debugged without too much pain. On Linux, I cringe every time I have to fix a broken GUI.
I'm sure there are lots of Linux developers that are smarter than I am, but, really, Microsoft has pushed hard to make the developer tools usable and productive, so much so that they're actually worth the cost. The result is that it's easier to develop more apps faster on their platform.
Just one opinion.
I know why I switched back to Windows - I couldn't figure out into what directory I should install new programs. I searched high and low for a how-to to explain one simple thing, couldn't find the answer despite hours of searching, realized the more difficult questions would be impossible to find answers to, and gave up.
Linux geeks are extremely good at what they do, but no one has come up with a Idiot Newbie Guide to Linux article or even a Top 10 Things Newbies Should Know About Linux list. Y'all have to dumb some of this stuff down.
No, I mean dumber than even that.
Even the more polished Linux distros such as Ubuntu have their little quirks that you either have to live with or go the trouble to fix which could mean hours of trouble that the average person is not willing to go through. As time has progressed, this has gotten better but it is still not completely there. The other is lack of commercial software support for software that everyone already uses. I can't even watch Netflix on my Linux install without a Windows VM. Even when a business chooses to create a Linux version of their software, the software sends to have a subset of the functionality of the Windows version. I still haven't even mentioned gaming. All this said, when I can use it for what I am doing, I prefer Linux. The powerful command line alone is worth it.
Because with windows and macs, you can realistically expect someone to help over if you have questions that you need answered. That includes dumb things like 'how do I install my printer'. *Some people* find asking someone else to handle their problem far easier than looking it up online. By some people I mean the majority of people.
IMHO, it's because Ubuntu was really the only distro that had a fighting chance at "mass" adoption (that number is relative, but considering how MacOX was sitting at 9% for an eternity...) with their tri-force of:
A pretty, and relatively user friendly interface,
A centralized software update suites that didn't requiring googling what to sudo apt-get for in a console
And pretty good brand recognition and media attention.
UNTIL they decided to completely over-indulge their own sense of relevance by forcing the mandatory Unity interface on users with some absolutely retarded idea that they would to do this for the huge wave of tablet adoption they were now going to see, since I'm assuming Desktop users are already totes in the Ubuntu bandwagon?
I think the real issue isn't that (consumer) Desktop Linux hasn't taken off, but that the people behind the main distro that actually had a fighting chance decided to chop some of the more useful limbs off of it to make it more...fingerable.
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/102599-ubuntu-14-04-will-be-a-smartphone-and-tablet-os-so-what
I've been using as my primary operating system for well over 10 years. For typical programming/office work it's just easier to deal with than Windows. This is especially true when my job requires to connecting to other Unix based boxes and the majority of my work is done on command line.. I feel neutered every time I have to go back to windows..
Personally I don't care what the masses like..
I have played with linux distros of various flavors over the years. They install easily, usually recognize all the hardware with no problems and are easy enough to tweak and navigate. I usually give up when I need to install a program I've downloaded from the web. It is never as easy as running an executable on Windows. When it starts telling me to open a terminal and enter a string of commands, I get lost and give up. Fix this one issue and I would be a convert.
IMHO the problem has a lot to do with managing a large number of computers. I'm no expert, but I do have a decent understanding of UNIX, I can configure a working Linux distro for personal use, etc, and when I studied the possibility of migrating a large part of a small company (40+ machines) to Linux, the biggest problem was how to mantain them, restrict permissions, etc. Something along the lines of MS's Group Policies is needed.
It didn't take off because it was never treated as a platform. It lacked vision of competent professionals at the very top who could put their foot down and tell the people in the chain that an OS doesn't really need 5 pre-compiled IRC clients or web browsers.
Once you ask the user to launch the terminal you've failed.
Notice I'm speaking in past tense. The desktop thing is coming to an end. It's over, Jack. The only hope for linux from here on out is SOC ODM implementations as plumbing. We're already in the post-PC appliance era and I don't see many prospects for Linux as an alternative.
It might be Android today, or something else in the future, but that's where Linux will stay - in name only. Desktop wars are over.
1) Most enterprise level software does not work on linux.
2) Most linux distros do some things great and others so bad it's not an option
3) Most software most non technical users want to use does not have a linux install
4) Linux savy techs (actually know wtf they are talking about) cost almost double what a windows tech does in salary
5) Companies know that the equipment they get will work with windows. Finding obscure linux drivers for a network card, video card... etc can be extremely difficult.
It basically comes down to Windows does more out of the box than linux because it was designed to be that way. For linux to become acceptable in a normal corporate world it will take the ability to emulate windows and run it's software.
One of the hurdles is the number of business applications written exclusively for MS OS for which there are no readily available Linux substitute. It's simply an economy of scale issue. For software with a broad base of users, ie GIMP, OpenOffice, WebBrowser, and etc, there are no shortage of quality Linux alternatives. However, for less popular software in accounting, shipping, inventory management, barcodes, and etc, the user base is simply too small for a quality Linux alternative to be created. While the number of Linux application is increasing and quality is improving it will take years for the open source community to fill in the various niche software being used in the business world.
Microsoft Office. I don't want to hear about the 'compatible alternatives', no one really cares. That is all. It's available for Windows and Mac OS X, and the non-technical higher-ups who make the decisions don't care either. Also, you'd be surprised at how many big businesses still use Lotus Notes...
The great opportunity for Linux on the desktop was a decade ago. Back when Windows 95 sucked, Windows XP was late, and Windows 2000 cost several hundred dollars. That's when it could have happened. It didn't.
There was a second chance when the netbooks came in. But that, too, was botched. For a moment, it looked like the future of computing was a $99 Linux netbook in a bubble pack at WalMart. This terrified the industry. The EeePC Linux was badly broken, especially in the networking area. Microsoft frantically revived XP, and then, with the cooperation of the PC industry, tried to destroy the netbook industry. Companies which also produced PCs were told they'd lose their Microsoft volume discount if they sold a Linux netbook. Hence, the "Asus recommends Windows 7" branding. Similar pressure was applied to dealers. You can buy low cost Linux netbooks from suppliers in Shenzen right now, but try to find one at a US retailer. (The current ASUS EeePC 1001, at $200, which is a quite capable little computer. was supposed to be a Linux machine. It's only available with Windows 7.)
The answer is marketing, including but not limited to pre-installs which are probably the most powerful form of marketing to be had in the desktop market.
'We get a lot more questions about switching to Macs than switching to Linux at this point, even though Macs are more expensive,' one Gartner analyst says.
You mean the operating system with multiple millions of dollars of advertising and marketing behind it has a greater mindshare among the general public than the one put together by volunteers with no such backing? Colour me shocked.
(This is not to say that Linux doesn't have its problems, of course. But to suggest like the top poster here that Linux "consolidate" its distributions into one shows a serious misunderstanding of what Linux is and how it's put together.)
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
The article mentioned manageability problems with Linux on the desktop and I disagree. Check out puppet for helping to manage systems. I have a soft spot for open source, particularly CentOS and OpenBSD. Again, from the article, if the Chester County Cat Hospital in the Greater Philadelphia area can deploy Linux on the desktop and server, then just about anyone can. I was amazed that anyone could find an open source practice management system. Generally, I think this article was not too well written but I am impressed at the research done to discover the Chester County Cat Hospital. I actually know of that practice and used to live in the area. Additionally, here is an article written about a company specializing in open source usage in business. A company by the name of MTier has done it, and in the process, is able to basically architect a system that is so secure that it would probably surpass standard auditing requirements by a wide margin: A Puffy in the corporate aquarium
It does, moron. Ever heard of SDL?
First, the biggest reason that business does not look at changing is the cost of retooling. Most businesses are soo tied into windows that they can not even consider an alternative. They have thousands of not hundreds of thousands tied up in the windows infrastructure that would, for the most part have to be scrapped and replaced. From communicator, exchange, Antivirus, share point, you name it and if it is a Microsoft product then it is designed to work with windows. I have known several large companies that looked at moving to Linux desktops, once you worked out the cost of retooling, retraining, and the disruption to the end user, it was cost prohibitive.
Now to home use, I think Linux as a home desktop is far more prevalent that most people think. I know quite a few non-tech people now running linux as a home desktop. I have noticed that almost every software provider has listed in there FAQ "Do you provide a version for Linux?" If it is a frequently asked question then, IMHO, it is far more prevalent than many believe. The issue here is proof, with windows it is sales but buying a Linux desktop is not as easy as going to Walmart and buying a windows one. Top that off with the fact that all systems sold with windows count towards windows numbers even when they are wiped and Linux is installed. So the real question is how many linux desktops are there and what is the best way to identify them. Until those questions are answered we really have no way of knowing how big the population is.
Cost of purchase really isn't much for windows and office, compared to the cost of screening hiring and training an employee a few hundred for the software on their computer is not a major factor for a business, the True Total Cost of Ownership is not taken into account until a business gets keistered hard by a BSA audit and has operations interrupted, trade secrets stolen, and forced to settle because the same key was used on two machines (even though there were enough legit keys for all users)
if the business survives this they may look to rid themselves of all BSA affiliated software.
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
Dekstop Linux hasn't taken off because people don't want a powerful OS that does what they tell it to. They want trinkets that keep them entertained. It's the same reason why McDonalds sells billions of hamburgers a year, why Home Ec is the chief focus of The Learning Channel, and why Kurtzmann and Orci keep getting work. People are stupid, end of story.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
300+ Ubuntu residential installations and many business desktops/laptops and counting. When I approach an infected Windows computer I suggest a migration from windows to Ubuntu. I charge the same price to clean windows or migrate to Ubuntu. When they realise that they don't have to keep paying me to come back and clean windows again and again they chose to go with the migration to Ubuntu and are quite happy with their choice. Almost every one of them have not heard of Linux until I come along and give them the option.
We had a chance to get Linux On the Desktop in 2006 with Vista "that looked like Windows 7 (to come later) but crashed like Windows 95". So X% of users suffered, y% stayed on XP, Z% went to Mac. Let's just say "no one" (for LARGE values of "no one" in quotes) went to Linux.
But maybe we're on the edge of an even better chance. We're all being shoved off of XP soon, headlong into Windows 8 Metro. Metro will NOT look anything like Windows. It might not even run a lot of apps so the compatibility advantage weakens.
So just maybe, if we can get a couple of overall policy direction leaders that the techies really trust, (with no single one in charge for fairness?) then maybe someone who likes Disruptive business can tap a silent investor with a BIG pocket to churn 30,000 developer-hours to cleaning up the inter-operability problems in Linux. (Maybe some cross-distro middleware?)
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
All of the +ve praise for the Linux desktop comes from... the linux community!
Try asking non-Linux people what they think of it, and maybe you'll get realistic feedback.
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
Because Linux still is way behind on the desktop, and even when many things have been fixed over the years, the other OS's available have also matured, and right now a Linux desktop is harder and more time consuming to manage than OSX by any metrics. For the average user, unless you need something specific that only Linux supports (i.e. specific hardware), or unless you are a geek type and enjoy upgrading kernels and recompiling device drivers by hand every couple of months, the Linux desktop experience is still frustrating. Disclaimer: I use Linux on my desktop every day.
Back when Amiga had no direction (lol, thats a joke, it never had direction), but I'm talking after it got sold a few times, instead of making a new godly expensive hardware, they should of converted the spirit and look and feel of Amiga's OS Workbench.
While the hardware would of been different, it could of been a clean start for Amiga, and provided a good desktop that might have been a uniting one. Of course, since it never happened, we will never know, but in my opinion, that is the direction Amiga should of went back in the 90's.
Be seeing you...
I'll probably get a lot of hate for saying that, but linux desktop environments have never been considered a "complete product" which you can just release like new windows version and only post bug and security fixes after that.
There's a never-ending development cycle in which everyone wants to have X, Y and Z while, say only X gets implemented as everyone likes, Y gets implemented as the developers saw it and it's totally useless for an ordinary user and Z was scrapped halfway in development because someone decided another feature W would be better. And sometimes, someone will decide the whole thing needs a rewrite and everything starts from scratch.
Most desktop users don't care for such things - they just want to get things done. If something doesn't work for them, they will sooner switch back to windows, than search for fixes, post bug reports or use any forums. And of course, if it is easily fixed by a command in a terminal, they won't even hear of it.
I say that linux desktop will be truly user-friendly *only* when there's a stable development and integration of all desktop components - that goes for desktop environment, X, packaging & update system, etc. etc.
because everytime we get one of these posts there are a huge string of insightful comments on somethings people don't know how to do on linux, how hard it is to do things, how fractured it is, how incompatible it is with things people know etc. etc. etc. are all right. And will continue to be right. Because linux is intentionally decentralized and open. Which just makes it widely confusing and difficult for non experts.
People know windows. If that adds 100 dollars to the price of 500 dollars of hardware it's irrelevant, because people either can't do what they want on linux or don't want to waste time learning linux when they already know how on windows. For most of us in the relatively well off parts of the world the price of windows isn't going to somehow drive us out of the market. And it's worth it if it means you can sit down and do whatever you wanted with the computer, rather than spend time mucking with the computer to get it to do what you want. MS of course likes to make things difficult (see the ribbon and windows 8) but we'll see how the latter plays out.
My 2 bob is , although it is easy to use , most of the plebs are happy in their current environment , when u mention linux to the masses they think eeewww no thats for ubergeks, we know thats not the case nowadays but i think that is a major factor on putting off the masses, most dont want to take the time to learn the minor differences when using the GUI , however personally speaking ive sat and showed 3 family members how to get by using linux and they all love it and use it as their main OS now.
Here's what I think are the five biggest reasons, in roughly descending order of importance:
1) Microsoft Office - like it or not, Microsoft Office is by a huge margin the dominant office suite. You have a presentation to give tomorrow? You better make sure it works on that Windows/Office computer that is connected to the overhead projector. Fuck ups in document formatting/compatibility will not be acceptable. Morale of the story: Until an open source program can read and write Microsoft office documents at damn close to 100% fidelity to their windows counterparts, this will be a HUGE obstacle.
2) Games - Despite repeated predictions of its imminent demise, the PC gaming market should not be underestimated. To some extent, this is a viscous cycle: the Linux community ignores the potential increase in market share from gamers, and software companies ignore the Linux market (because it's too small to be economically viable).
3) Poor UI choices - Unity. Enough said.
4) Package installation/management - Let's say a hypothetical windows-to-linux convert wants to install a program. If he's using a distro that uses apt/yum, and if what he wants to install is available in the repositories, and if the distro is configured to use those repositories by default, then he's in pretty good shape. If any of these conditions doesn't hold, then our user is screwed. This is one area where Windows is light years ahead of Linux. If you get a Windows installer and run it, it installs with a minimum of hassle, and you'll never ever be told that your compiler is out-of-date or to use certain compiliation flags or to manually install a dozen dependencies.
5) Lack of standardization in configuration - It is not helpful to google a problem and get eight different answers depending on which distro you use. Like the poor UI choices, this is largely a self-inflicted wound.
To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
--E.C. Stanton
The one company that could've made it happen was Red Hat. They had the brand, the mindshare, the financial and marketing muscle, the corporate relationships, the ties to the developer communities. But they decided that their consumer distro was hurting their stock price, so out it went.
Every other vendor has a "flavor of the month" feel to it. Since everything except the high level graphics is typically FOSS, any distro can be knocked off in days and be marketed as "like Ubuntu's, but with hot new package X installed by default, plus we made better decisions on features Y and Z."
Ernie Ball ran a company (they make guitar strings).
One day the BSA shows up, armed marshals in tow, to do an audit.
They find a few systems out of compliance, and the lawyers negotiate a settlement.
These thing happen, right? Cost of doing business, right?
But then the BSA thought, hey, this guy has name recognition.
He's connected to music; the kids know who he his.
We'll make an example of him.
And they did.
They ran ads that named him as a pirate;
they got his case on the evening news.
Mr. Ball took exception to this.
So he went to his IT people and told them that he wanted Microsoft out of his company in 6 months.
So they switched to RedHat.
More into at http://news.cnet.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html
My take-away from this is that Microsoft is running on inertia.
Not theirs: their customers'.
Microsoft persists because their customers don't have a compelling reason to switch.
But given a reason, switching to Linux is no big deal.
At any point in time,
most of the world is 6 months from Linux,
and Microsoft is 6 months from oblivion.
This is probably going to get modded as troll as I do not have any account and I am posting like AC. I prefer myself Linux over Windows or OSX, but I can see why people are not chosing it:
1. We do not have the year of Linux on the desktop, we have the year of linux desktops: Bad desktops have made people to fork over and over. I do not know anymore how many gnome forks we have, kde people are divided still between 3.5 and 4.x, then we have xfce and a few minor ones. Choices are great, but now it has gone too far.
2. Gaming! While I never play games myself, many buy computers so their kids can play their games they got at christmas.
3. Hardware. Windows comes as default in most computers and those interested in Apple gets OSX as default
Linux is just software, with very few minor hardware companies shipping Linux as default.
4. Upgrade cycles too painful for normal user. Most distros are having way too much quirks when upgrading than a normal user would want to go through it, and that twice a year. When you buy windows, you do not upgrade anything else than normal updates until the computer gets retired. Only a fraction are doing upgrades like vista -> 7.
Desktop Linux is what a popular free software product looks like. Albeit one that has had next to no marketing, advertising or commercial promotion. One that has been pitched exclusively at "geeks" and makes it hard for ordinary people to know how to install, use or discover what they can do with it.
The big lesson must about the power of marketing. Make sure that before a product is released, your potential customers (as Linux is not and never has been free - it has always needed a considerable expenditure of time, if not money, to learn) have a clear understanding of what it is, why it's better and what benefits they'll get from using it.
Linux has never done any of those things. At best it's provided a dense, arcane and occasionally accurate list of "features" (not benefits) and expected people to recognise their worth, be able to understand the small amount of "help" and then to put up with some generally poorly designed UIs.
Although the price-cost is quite low, sometimes zero, the time-cost of installing and using Linux is extremely high - much higher than the competition's. In these days when everyone is complaining about how busy they are, time is a precious commodity and the risk of spending a lot of time trying to get Linux to work, on your PC with all your specific hardware - and then failing is more than most people are prepared to gamble.
Finally, Linux has never really understood that for most people, Windows is "free". it comes pre-installed in their machines and is not an itemised (or optional) component. As a consequence, they'll use what they've already got - rather than throw it away and try something new. After all, the O/S is irrelevant - it's what applications you can run, to achieve the things you want to do, that is the only thing which matters.
Given all these basic promotional points that have been missed, ignored or done wrong, it's amazing that Linux has managed to stay around for as long as it has - and that it's achieved the penetration it currently enjoys.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
I run Linux in VMWare because of stupid hardware issues that never go away after years:
- Buggy video drivers, making X blowup to the extent that re-installing from scratch is faster than fixing the problem
- Flakey sleep/suspend support
- Crappy touchpad support, causing the cursor to jump around whenever my palm hovers 1mm above the touchpad... also, if there are going to be 30 different ways to disable mouse tapping depending on the distro, shouldn't one of them work?
On laptops, it can be a usability nightmare for the average sort of user that they're trying to attract.
I use Linux on the desktop since 2001. Used many distros. Also I gave something back: I'm the author of two desktop applications packaged into Debian and many other distros. So I'm no Linux detractor.
That said, throughout the years, I witnessed a constant stream of regressions during updates. Regressions happen in every aspect the of the system, from kernel drivers, codecs, sound system and specific apps. To make it worst, most distros, including Ubuntu, deal with regressions in the usual open source way: if there is interest and time it will eventually get fixed. Months or years can pass. IMO this is unacceptable for businesses. This lack of quality may very well be the reason Linux desktop has not taken off.
Check out my cross-platform apps
You just don't get the idea behind open-source software so all your arguments are quite silly!
For me the power is the multiple choices:
- I don't like the de/wm I switch
- I don't like the OS I switch
- I would like to add a feature to some program, I do my best to actually add it myself
For the average user Ubuntu, Mint and Fedora are the OS'es I would recommend and I really don't get the whole compatability argument because the average user doesn't need to deal with the underlying "mechanics" of the system and if for example some workplace would be Linux-only with different distros they would most definetely have a Linux-admin of some sorts and for a Linux guy it's not a problem that the workplace has multiple OS'es. I've actually managed a small computer-lab (15 computers with Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, Debian, Arch and a CentOS server) for the past year and I've never had any problems and I wouldn't consider myself an intermediate Linux-user in comparison to a few guys I know.
Of course for the business-side of things there is RHEL whom I consider to be a business distro and many companies use that because of the "vendor-support".
My parents have been using Ubuntu for two years now without any hiccups and although they were a bit unsure at the time it's paid off.
A similar story of my grandpa which uses Ubuntu and my in laws that use Mint.
So if you want OS'es for the average user you pick Ubuntu or Mint (haven't tested Fedora on relatives or friends). If you want a business distro you use and pay for RHEL. If employees want different distros chances are that one of them really knows his stuff, if not you hire a Linux-admin like you would hire a Windows-admin for day to day tasks or to solve problems the average user can't.
In a world without fences and walls, who needs gates and windows?
Video drivers for linux continue to suck. The GUIs to configure the video drivers also continue to suck, especially when compared against the Windows equivalents. The CLI programs work, but are poorly documented at best.
If I can't watch a movie after installing Linux, I'm not going to use it.
I'm kinda the I guy for family and friends, recommending, installing, building, fixing... PCs I've been trying out Linux every year or so for the past 10 years, and here's why I still can't use it and wont recommend it:
- Install not reliable. Only last year, Ubuntu's Grub2 couldn't handle being the only bootloader on a 100% linux AMD-chipset PC. I'm sure I ran into a weird bug yadda-yadda, except same PC was perfectly OK in Windows. Spent 4 week ends discussing the issue with the dev, who seemed nice enough, but in the end I wanted to actually use that machine, so I reinstalled WIndows. Also, configuring 2 different-size monitors doesn't seem to be easy.
- Missing apps. Sorry, but about 2/3rds of users need MS Office. Not Libre, not anything else. Import-export filters just aren't good enough yet.
- Broken stuff. As my own personnal PC, I use a dual-screen setup, with the best monitor on the right, and a junk one on the left. I need the menu bar on the right side of the rightmost screen. Ubuntu won't let me do that. Switching their wierd new UI off, I can get a right-side menu.. but it's written sideways.
- no docs. In the end, I just have one ARM nettop running linux right now. Took me about a month to set it up, helped by a guy who knew how to recompile kernels and apps. And it's still not 100% to my taste, because man pages are out of synch with what's actually delivered with the PC, and looking for info online usually returns results not relevants to my version (got me to set "screens" instead of "tmux", nowhere showing how to autolaunch a daemon in a foreground screen in Upstart... etc, etc..). Cnfig files are all over the place, sometimes litterally in several places at once, gonna guess which one is actually used.
- not reliable. This one gonna hurt most, but my Linux PC segfaults several times a week, while my Windows 7 PCs have crashed I think twice since 7's release, and I have 3 of them.
- battery life on laptops. for some reason, my nettop lasts several hours less under Linux (I think it has debian), than under Windows.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
Because it sucks ass compared to Windows or OS X. That's why. You sycophantic Linux twats can keep proclaiming how Linux is going to rise, but you're spitting into the wind. Linux is going nowhere. I've heard for 10 f#cking years how Linux was going to eventually dominate. Yet it's still below 1% market share. Nobody wants the damn thing except Microsoft hating nerds who like to fiddle with their systems constantly, which pretty much describes most of you on this site.
centOS 6.2 supported til 2017.
gnome 2 (no unity yeahhh!)
desura and soon steam for games WOOT!
libre office
Make sure firefox or chrome can handle the web based business products.
Just need a real outlook client clone that does free/busy correctly to hook to customer's hosted exchange and we are done.
It's the year 2012, fix sound.
Sound doesn't work out of the box. They have the abomination (IMHO) that is PulseAudio so I do an apt-get purge. Suddenly sound works.
So I go and try to play 2 things at once. [Unless you have ALSA setup a specific way with mixers it won't do it because only one PID gets to talk to hardware at once.] Wow it works. Maybe they started shipping a working ALSA config. I go check /etc/asound.conf. Everything is still set to pulse.
So I check task manager. Sure enough the pulse server is still cranking away. But by purging all the files it somehow magically started to work. So I re-install it.
I repeat the test. Somehow mplayer decides it wants to grab ALSA instead of pulse but ALSA then grabs the hardware, so pulse dies and can't communicate to ALSA (which is actually doing the hardware interfacing if I read my workflow correctly). So now I have no sound, again.
So I try it straight from mplayer specifying the hardware device and it works. Except only in mplayer. So now I'm going to spend another few hours dicking with either the dmix plugin or deciding to give Pulse a 5th chance.
Fork something or start something from scratch. Something like MATE/GNOME2. And make it 'just work'.
There are three basic reasons why I don't use Linux on my Desktop:
1. Software
I use particular software because a) I like it and b) I've paid for it. a) is the biggie here. I like FeedDemon to read RSS feeds. I paid for it. I like it. It works well. And it isn't on Linux. Indeed there is no equivalent for Linux. This is only one. There is other software that, quite frankly, has no acceptable analogue in Linux. Also, why should I have to learn a new, often substandard, application in Linux when what I know and like is already working in Windows?
2. Hardware
Specifically, drivers... Ever tried to use dial-up with Linux? Know how damned frustrating it is to be told "Nobody uses dial-up anymore." and then dismissed? I do. And I was stuck on dial-up until *this year*. Yes, I went through all the various websites, tutorials and FAQs and still had a helluva time figuring it out. Contrast with Windows where it just worked without my having to hunt down settings to use, changing MTU/MRU values, or figuring out chat scripting. Same thing is happening with my Sierra 3G/4G modem (250U by model number). Doesn't work in Linux. Searching the web, fora, FAQs leads to frustrating and contradictory "possibilities of getting it working." On Windows, I installed the software, rebooted, plugged in modem and was up and working.
3. Linux is just not ready for the Desktop
Until you can just plug & play with Linux as you can with Windows, Linux just simply isn't ready for the Desktop. Linux is a wonderful system and, frankly, I'd prefer it for nearly any other use OTHER than my Desktop where I just want things to work, not get in my way and not make me hunt down ways to make it work. Just work.
In the end, I don't find any OS better or worse than any other. Linux, however, is damned frustrating to use when you want to just work and not have to re-learn things you already know/like/prefer. /D
Think of me when you shave your legs...
With Windows I know I can just pick Windows Starter if a netbook is needed and the netbook is a 10.1" screen or less. If it's larger then it's called an Ultrabook and that means Windows Home is an option if networking isn't a big deal or connecting to a Windows network. There's Windows Media Edition for all kinds of multimedia fun but the hardware needs to be beefy enough to support it. If the home computer is going to be used for work then I'll need to make sure to upgrade or get the Windows Professional version so it can connect to the network at work. If we get a site license then there's the Windows Enterprise version and that comes with a bunch of client licenses because I need licenses every client when connecting to Microsoft's server software.
With Windows it's just so easy and with Linux there are just too many choices.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Let's see ... there's four Windows desktops and laptops and one Linux desktop/server in my household in common use.
But looking at other systems ...
Three Kindle Fires, running Android (Linux).
Two original Nooks, running Android (Linux).
Two smart phones, one running Android (Linux) and one is an iPhone (not Linux.)
One Boxee Box, running Linux.
One Chumby alarm clock, running Linux.
I'm not sure, but the cable company provided DVR might run Linux. (The DirectTV Tivo I had previously certainly did.)
In my household, it seems that Linux has already won. Just not on the desktop.
I'm the tech support person for my parents. They are smart people but I know a lot about Linux and I sure as hell am not going to be leaving a desktop Linux machine under their Christmas tree when I consider the support calls that would be coming my way. They love their Mac and supporting them on the Mac is easy. Most computer users are like my parents. They are not passionate geeks like me. Linux is for servers and passionate geeks.
"IT staffers know it and love it, and it has fewer viruses and Trojans than Windows."
Yet Windows still dominates in servers. As for the viruses comments, it has fewer viruses because it's market share is negligible at best. So virus creators don't even think about it when targeting an OS. Why bother with 1% when you can go after 90%? Linux is not more secure. It's just irrelevant.
The reason the Linux is not on every desktop is that - the end user can download a version, install it - and become root/admin without IT knowing.
IT wants centralized control, and Linux does not offer that.
I am a CS person. I work at a major university doing programming. So, when I'm at home, I rate my time at something like $10 per hour. So, especially since I get Windows for free, I need to value my time at how much I am willing to pay for an education in the Linuxes.
For a long time I had a Debian install. It took me about $100 in time to get wireless working flawlessly on it.
Then I had an Ubuntu install. It worked out-of-the-box with my wireless card, but it still cost about $10 per week in time, switching back and forth between OSes. If we consider the fact that distractions (like switching to a different partition to get at a program I need to do the fun-work I am doing) cost about 15 minutes of time, it jumps up to maybe $50 per week.
After I got World of Warcraft working in Wine, the time-money saved from not playing WoW vanished. I was just costing myself time-money. I decided to take the $20 hit to figure out how to put Windows at the top of GRUB's startup screen and went back to using Windows 7.
If I want to use Linux, I slap it inside of a virtual machine and go from there. And screw Unity. Screw it in its bevel-edged asshole.
What is compelling about Windows or OS X or Linux? These days, not much. Operating systems have pretty much become fungible. A corporation is going to pick the platform that runs the necessary software and that their staff can support. Lots of places now let employees choose the platform because often all that's really required is a modern web browser.
Individuals are going to pick what friends or salespeople recommend. I personally haven't recommended anything other than Apple hardware in the past few years just because if they call me looking for help and I can't solve their issue, they can always take their machine into the Apple store.
Instead of answering why Linux hasn't succeeded on the desktop, I'd like you to answer why it should? I don't really see anybody actively targeting desktop Linux with the goal of gaining market share. What I see is mostly people scratching their own itch without any regard to what might be useful to a very wide userbase.
Linux works great for Grandma,
Linux works great for IT folks.
Linux sucks in the middle. That is why Linux is Strong in the Server area and in the Mobile Phone area. However lacking in the desktop area.
The key features for the Middle, that isn't really all that easy in Linux.
Adding new hardware. Some stuff just works, other stuff is a real big pain. Mac and Windows (due to its popularity mostly) has the hardware vendors supply them with drivers, or when you get the hardware you have an easy to use install for the drivers. Linux you may be able to find the drivers, but you have many versions and you need to do a lot of research to see which one is going to do what you need it to do.
For example my Wifes Dell Inspiron 9 mini (Netbook) with Ubuntu display 800x600 while the screen native resolution is 1024x600... I cannot use the normal GUI to fix that. The instruction on how to do so, are cryptic and sometimes don't work. while the 800x600 stretched bugs the heck out of me. My Wife doesn't care, so I wont do much to fix it. That is after I spent time to get sound working on it, after an upgrade.
I am sorry but compared to Windows and OS X, Linux is a Free Desktop OS and it shows. Put it in a server great, put it in a phone just as good. The desktop is the troubled area.
Part of the issue I think, is they are spending too much time copying what Microsoft does or what Apple does, and the Open Source democratic structure doesn't have a few good people to say it sucks or it is good.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
When I can play all my windows games on it without having to run a VM / WINE I will run linux.
The answer is simple. To many people Linux is still this magical OS, which is for computing experts / geeks / hackers only. Most average joe's dont even know that an alternative OS exists.
Ubuntu for example is the perfect OS for the average joe. I know that most of the hardcore linux community doesnt like Unity (I have changed to KDE because of Unity), but for the average Joe, Ubuntu 12.04 is a fantastic OS. Many people will claim "Compatibility" issues and support issues. The truth is however that most hardware has support out of the box. No drivers installation needed.
Some examples:
1) Printers. All I need is to connect the printer. I never had to download any drivers (which I do need to download for my Canon iP 4500 or Brother DCP-9055CDN).
2) 3G wireless usb sticks. This was a huge surprise. On Windows, I need to install some weird applications to get the internet to work. On Ubuntu? I simply inserted the stick, was asked which Network Operator the sim card belongs to and enter the pin. Im connected to the internet.
3) VPN... On Windows I need to install additional applications, On Ubuntu? Its built in.
4) All other hardware. Most works out of the box. No hunting for drivers online, everything just works (On common hardware).
Of course there is the issue of the people who run non-common hardware, such as TV-cards, special capture cards, etc. where no drivers are provided for linux. But for the common user? Ubuntu is ready, it is just that the common user is unaware...
"Security-By-Obscurity" - lack of users = lack of attacks. Android proves otherwise though, especially for Linux variants, where it is "king of the smartphone world", OS-wise, & is being attacked rampantly.
* So, IS it possible for Windows users to NOT see infestations?
Sure, with a bit of education & good easy to use tools to help them thru it, such as CIS Tool ( http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9018362/CIS_tool_aims_to_help_federal_agencies_check_Windows_security_settings ) &/or guides like this one I did in 2007 onwards (& I've been doing them since 1997):
http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&qs=ns&form=QBLH
("Layered-Security"/"Defense-in-Depth" is 'the way', & the best thing we have going vs. today's "malware-ridden-world" online... & yes, it actually works (alongside showing users who are NOT "technical computer gurus" or "security pros" some basic ideas/concepts to be aware of to help them help themselves via this concept...)
In fact, here's a quoted example of a fellow who applied it to his OWN systems, AND THOSE OF HIS CLIENTS (+ the results for over a year long period on that account):
To "immunize" a Windows system, I effectively use the principles in "layered security" possibles, per the link above!
I.E./E.G.-> I have done so since 1997-1998 with the most viewed, highly rated guide online for Windows security there really is which came from the fact I also created the 1st guide for securing Windows, highly rated @ NEOWIN (as far back as 1998-2001) here:
http://www.neowin.net/news/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text
& from as far back as 1997 -> http://web.archive.org/web/20020205091023/www.ntcompatible.com/article1.shtml which Neowin above picked up on & rated very highly.
That has evolved more currently, into the MOST viewed & highly rated one there is for years now since 2008 online in the 1st URL link above...
Which has well over 500,000++ views online (actually MORE, but 1 site with 75,000 views of it went offline/out-of-business) & it's been made either:
---
1.) An Essential Guide
2.) 5-5 star rated
3.) A "sticky-pinned" thread
4.) Most viewed in the category it's in (usually security)
5.) Got me PAID by winning a contest @ PCPitStop (quite unexpectedly - I was only posting it for the good of all, & yes, "the Lord works in mysterious ways", it even got me PAID -> http://techtalk.pcpitstop.com/2007/09/04/pc-pitstop-winners/ (see January 2008))
---
Across 15-20 or so sites I posted it on back in 2008... & here is the IMPORTANT part, in some sample testimonials to the "layered security" methodology efficacy:
---
SOME QUOTED TESTIMONIALS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SAID LAYERED SECURITY GUIDE I AUTHORED:
http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=672ebdf47af75a0c5b0d9e7278be305f&t=28430&page=2
"I recently, months ago when you finally got this guide done, had authorization to try this on simple work station for kids. My client, who paid me an ungodly amount of money to do this, has been PROBLEM FREE FOR MONTHS! I haven't even had a follow up call which is unusual." - THRONKA, user of my guide @ XTremePcCentral
AND
"APK, thanks
Jean-Louis Gassée had it right at the Microsoft anti-trust trials over embedding IE in the OS.
He has something like (I do not remember the exact quote); It's the application barrier to entry. If there aren't enough users of the operating system, developers will not write applications for it. If there aren't enough applications for it, the users will not chose it.
That being said, as a user of Linux, Windows and OS X over the years, I see what is limiting Linux adoption as three things. In no special order:
Microsoft Office
Gaming
Photoshop
I know there are solutions to all three factors here, but those are the reasons.
Procrastination; I'll think of a sig tomorrow.
I bought my 77 year old Grandmother a Macbook a few years ago. It was the first time she'd ever used a computer. I showed her a few things, and got her a highly recommended book on the mac for novices.
She plays games like solitaire and frozen bubble, prints recipes (reams of them!), emails, enters contests, and orders a few things from Amazon (but only with gift cards - too paranoid to use a visa online, yet she'll write anyone a check).
She is now 82 and the Mac just reached it's five year anniversary.
I would have liked to have given her a Linux laptop, but I just didn't see it being consistently user friendly enough, especially over the long haul.
Can your OS pass the "Grandma test"?
People don't like choice. Linux has to much of it (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paradox_of_Choice:_Why_More_Is_Less)
People don't like change, Linux changes too fast.
People don't like uncertainty , Linux can be unpredictable.
People like control, nobody is controlling Linux.
People like for things to be simple, in Linux things are complicated.
Fortunately some people like the things above, that's why they made linux :)
Nerds like to fiddle, geeks like to tweak, but the average person does not see the computer as an end in itself. To them it is a tool to be used as a means to achieve other ends, and to that end, it must just work.
They do not want to spend long time configuring software. When a problem arises, they want a relatively singular solution. They don't want more options, they want better-organized options with good documentation and a support structure, and a clear "there's a right way to do it" hierarchy.
Linux is a hobbyist's system. Sometimes, it can take a week of hacking to get a soundcard to work. Often, software isn't a matter of being a tool, but a custom library that requires scripting. The normal user is not concerned about this.
Further, in the grand tradition of communities that sabotage themselves going back to the Amiga and Apple II communities of yore, the Linux community is self-sabotaging. First, it likes to imply a dichotomy between "knowledgeable" users and by implication un-knowledgeable users, when the actual dichotomy is more like hobbyists versus people using the computer for something else. Second, it is downright hostile to users when they make requests for technical help. Finally, it spends most of its energy on "fun" projects and ignores vital upgrades to existing but incomplete projects, including documentation.
Linux is a great achievement, and my life is better for it, but it has a long way to go to be ready for the desktop. Of course, one company adopting a distro and putting in the work to make it competitive could change all this, but with the community so hostile to anything corporate, I don't see that happening anytime soon.
Futurist Traditionalism
Believe it or not, Linux has an absolutely golden opportunity to deliver a 'better than Windows' experience to consumers it will more than likely miss. some of these issues are application developers fault. Others are Linux itself's fault. A few things:
- Stop doing Jacked up things to KDE, Gnome, and similar. No more Mandatory themes per distribution. Mandriva does this with ROSA, I had to make an RPM just to replace the ROSA theme.
- Harmonize RPM and DEB. An RPM be it a Suse RPM, or a Mandriva, or Fedora RPM should generation-ally, be able to be installed on any RPM based system that uses RPM. Same for Deb, although Deb is better than that.
- Application developers: Target SDL when making games (OpenGL for 3D). Do NOT use the deprecated X11 Video, Joystick, and similar input. Some Linux games still use these conventions which can result in crashes.
- For Retro Gamers: Linux is in a better emulation position than Windows on a few fronts with a few exceptions: Those being: Atari Jaguar, Sharp X68000, PC-9801. FM Towns/Marty. Fix this, and Linux has absolute supremacy in the legacy hardware emulation realm no 'virtual console' can match.
Linux has the ability using Wine to take ground and hold ground at all cost against Windows. Wine and Samba are the best example of this. The resilience of the Samba 3.x NT Domain backward compatibility issue has shown that Linux CAN alter Window's behavior. In the Samba realm Samba 3 took NT Domains, and to over come the lack of BDC support, added LDAP and Kerberos that was standard, creating Open Directories with multiple PDCs, forcing Microsoft to maintain backward compatibility far beyond what they wanted.
Now; with the entrenched position of AD, the same thing can happen again, Samba 4.0 can extend AD by tacking on OpenAFS Cell Clusters, and other things, and overcome AD's technical design limitations in the same way; creating a superior AD experience under Linux.
Wine stands to one up Windows 7 and XP for game compatibility with 9x. Try and make 9x games and XP games that don't work right hold ground over Windows 7.
In the new game arena, make sure that Wine can stand it's ground on Steam. make sure new games work Wine even without the creator's consent. If possible, try and get them to run better on Wine.
Ensure Linux has tools to clean Windows machines. Especially remotely that does not mean reformatting the machine.
Ensure that Linux can seamlessly run Android products. As with Wine, an Android API translation layer should be availible for Linux.
Hardware wise: With a Bluetooth Module, you should be able to seemlessly pair any PS3 Controller, Wiimote, and 360 Controller without Human intervention. This does work. But it takes Human intervention. I have to install drivers and an applet, and I have to launch that applet MANUALLY. If I have a Bluetooth module, or the 360 Dongle, it should work, perfectly, with the proper Quadrant lights, the first time. Currently I can make this work, by hand. But I shouldn't have too.
I have a feeling people will screw this up. They always do.
I used Redhat/Fedora as a desktop OS for almost 10 years. I switched to a Mac largely due to the 6 month upgrade treadmill in Linux. Unless you want to manage your own software in parallel to the package manager, you must upgrade in order to stay current with even Libreoffice or Firefox. Ubuntu wasn't an option due to the fact I needed solid multiarch support (which debian-style distros still don't have) to use my company VPN and CentOS/RHEL does not age well for desktop use. Unfortunately, I have had very little luck with "upgrades" and have done full reinstalls. I found I was spending more time on sysadmin tasks than on more important things like development.
Ubuntu is getting far better. PPAs allow some userland apps to be upgraded independently of the full system. Ubuntu LTS + PPAs is a very good Linux for a user who doesn't do development or use the latest software.
Sorry to burst your bubble but any app that runs on Windows 7 will also run on Windows 8. It's totally backwards compatible.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned yet is that font rendering on Linux is utterly horrible.
A couple years back I tried several Linux distributions. Looking at the browser window hurt my eyes – horribly blurry and aliased compared to the ClearType rendering in Windows. I downloaded and installed the MS corefonts and it didn't help. I even tried recompiling TrueType to support RGB subpixel rendering (which is not included by default!) and it still looked terrible compared to Windows. There doesn't seem to be any way to get TrueType to do RGB subpixel smoothing and yet for hinting to respect pixel boundaries the way that ClearType does. Instead it's all a blurry mess. Anti-Grain Geometry has some very promising open-source experimentation on font rendering, but sadly, so far it doesn't seem to be put into production in Linux or anything else.
Windows piracy is one of the major factors keeping Linux down. Linux doesn't 'work out of the box' in the same way that Windows does, and it's always a bit disheartening to come up across a glitch which there is seemingly no solution for (I couldn't get Minecraft to stop crashing after I got a new ATI card for example) but most of these things would be tolerable if your copy of Windows was £99 (your local currency may vary). However for a large chunk of the population readily available pirated copies of Windows 7 means that Windows is effectively free too, thus removing pretty much the only benefit that most people would see.
And think for a minute before your start spouting B.S.
All anyone has to do is:
take control of a version - first thing i would do is rip the package manager out of it. - Give the user only what they expect and no more.
Update it once a year and charge for it.
Commit to a user interface and never change it.
Oh, and switch to a BSD license so the madman who undertakes this endeavor can make some stinkin money.
Redhat should have called me before they dumped the desktop,
Ok, let the stupid responses not related to the question begin. My main point is there are too many hands in the free as in speech world. Everyone thinks they can build a better mouse trap, and they often do. Not enough people in the opensource world realize that the average consumer doesn't give a damn about free speech, they would rather have free beer (or less expensive beer) - As long as it tastes good.
And nobody is offering that to them.
I had Ubuntu installed on my desktop and loved it. Then I got an iphone. The lack of a decent solution for using iTunes caused me to go back to Windows on my desktop. I didn't want to dual boot, and the options for using iTunes were not sufficient.
That's the only reason I stopped and refuse to go back to Linux.
... when it is installed in a flying car.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
To say that Linux is too difficult is just plain foolish. If it`s too difficult, stay away.
At the risk of being flamed (wearing my fire-retardant underwear, so bring it) - I recently migrated my desktop AWAY from Linux for a variety of different reasons, many of which were outlined above. Like what? Well, multiple monitor support was always the big one for me. I haven't used fewer than 4 monitors on my home desktop for the last 5 or 6 years, and with Linux it was a constant battle to keep things working correctly. Why? Well, because NVIDIA (or ATI, doesn't seem to matter much) couldn't be bothered to update their code for the new kernel, or Xorg hasn't been updated for the last 4 kernels so if something doesn't work, then tough. Now, I can sit here and bitch about the plethora of issues that I was constantly having to fight (the aforementioned monitors, for example) - for example, virtually every upgrade broke X (multiple monitors, remember), but even beyond the issues that would sometimes take days or weeks to resolve there were larger issues at work. Such as? Unsupported packages (that are nonetheless required for a working setup). Devs that have no interest in supporting their own code, offering (more often than not) the standard "RTFM" (even if the issue isn't addressed, or their "manual" is a paragraph on what their software is supposed to do). The consistent elitist treatment afforded new users (and I haven't been a "new" Linux user since 1994).
This is just a handful of issues off the top of my head that prevent me from pushing Linux on anyone. If someone has more time on their hands and not enough stress in their lives I'll suggest it, but beyond that, NOBODY should have to put more hours into fixing a computer than they're able to put in on USING the damn thing...Linux is simply not mature enough to let that happen.
For teh fanbois out there: I am neither an M$ nor Apple shill...TBH they can all burn and I'd be just as happy. But the simple fact is that they are both more appropriate for end-users than Linux (both from a maintenance standpoint, as well as a support standpoint). If Linux were capable of competing in the Desktop market I would likely be just as happy to use it as any other OS...but it simply can't (and probably shouldn't) compete in that market...continuing to try to push it for the Desktop market (especially before it's ready) is only going to hurt the cause, not help it.
The poor choice of mascot has clipped the entire distribution.
Life is like a web application. Sometime you need cookies just to get by.
That Linux is nothing more than a would-be Windows on the desktop. The sad thruth is that is never brought anything new or worthwhile for the consumer.
Just imagine where it would be today if it hadn't been free.
Attention all anti-choice idiots who said "fragmentation":
GET OUT
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Let's start with ignorance: corporate management frequently has no idea you can buy linux support... or that they may already have people in house with that knowledge. And the eternal "no one ever lost their job by recommending IBM, er, Microsoft"
For home users, the amount of FUD is massive. Just the other week, I happened to hear a public radio talk show, the Kojo Naambi show, who apparently has a weekly computer segment. They had a techie... who when someone texted in to suggest open source software, said that he'd looked at open office, and it had a terrible interface, and that what did you expect for something that was free.
Terrible interface? In what way? And is it worse than The Ribbon idiocy?
Home users also have a lot of inertia. How many years do they run the same o/s without even security upgrades? What's going to push them to go buy or install a new o/s? And the stores - buy a new computer without Windows? Huh?
Which distro? I've worked with a few, and the obvious to me answer is a stable one, NOT a cutting edge one. I *loathe* fedora, for example, and gnome 3 is S0 K3WL F0R K1DZ. Actually *do* something other than play with the eye candy?
And Ubuntu's descent into k3wl with Unity is a take aim with .45 with both hands, shoot foot. Now shoot other foot. I mean, menus that disappear with a wave like a sheet in the wind? That pop up with an explosion? That's certainly the way it is on a 14 yr old's of my aquaintance....
OpenSuSE or RHEL or CentOS. Yeah, they may be a few years behind the latestgreatest... but they tend to be very, very stable. They don't have 80 updates this week... and another 20 on Friday. They may not support the hardware that came out this week... but if it came out six months ago, there's a really good chance it's supported.
Finally, I've had my computer-challanged fiancee on my CentOS box, and she's had as few or fewer problems than she has on the Vista box she has at home (yes, I'm *trying* to get her to go to Win 7, if she *has* to stay in Windows, but there's that $100+ on an o/s to spend....)
So, what's the issue with "which distro"? Just look at what's used most.
mark
There are hundreds of distros of linux, each with its own niche feat. Linux in these days has become far more user-friendly than ever before. However, as I see it, there are a few things that prevent it from becoming a majority in the world of operating systems. First, theres a lack in aggressive marketing. With windows and mac, there are huge, wealthy organizations backing them and aggressively marketing them. Linux largely depends on smaller organizations and person-to-person advertising, which just isn't getting it into the worlds eye like it needs to be. Next, windows comes pre-installed on many computers and laptops. It seems that the average person is more inclined just to stick with what they already have installed than to switch, even if there is a better option. Lastly, the world in general is just too uninformed when it comes to technology. We have a lot of older people that are just starting to learn what a computer is and are, in all likelihood getting trained to use windows. We see a similar trend in the school-system. Most schools still train students on windows machines, leaving them out of the loop on what other options are available. If a person actually knows the pros and cons of each OS option or is familiar enough with technology in general, it would seem to me they would be more open and inclined toward something that is free, powerful, opensource, and all-around better, such as linux. Just my two cents (or maybe three).
http://faazshift.blogspot.com/
Sorry for going off topic like that. Couldn't resist.
I feel like there is a post like this on slashdot every two weeks.
Linux has already taken off years ago, and most savvy people are using it. I understand some people can be frustrated because they can't get the cool operating system their savvy friends use to work, but do we really need to be repeated that so often?
Let the sheeple use whatever they're happy with and get off my loan.
So, I look at what I use frequently
AutoCad, Photoshop, Illustrator, Altium, Visual Studio, AVR Studio and all of the other various specialized device interfaces, like Home Theater Master MX-850
All are Windows only. And PLEASE don't tell me there are open source alternatives..even when they exist, they are pale imitations of the originals
About the only stuff I could do on Linux is, Firefox, Thunderbird and Open Office.
Overall the Linux desktop experience is a shitty experience, it's really as easy as that. And no, I don't mean the lack of games or commercial software, I just mean problems within the Free Software world itself. The complete lack of quality control, inconsistencies, stuff not working properly and so on. It simply looks and feels like what it is: A product cobbled together by thousands of people with little or no agreement on any consistency. It doesn't help that the Free Software world likes to hit the reset button every five years to switch to a new, yet completely incompatible and still completly unfinished desktop expierence.
Wanna improve things? Get together and define one distribution independed packaging format. And while at it, make it flexible so that it doesn't require root rights to install software, make it easy to share software with it, make it easy to get access to the source and modify it. Then start working on having apps cooperate with each other, give me flexible data import/export everywhere, so that I don't have to manually transfer my podcast subscriptions item by item when I want to switch players. Cleanup /home/ so that everything is in ~/.config/. Enhance the documentation system so that it's trivial to find out what files an application uses and where it stores your data (yeah, strace is great, it's not a replacement for documentation). And so on.
At this point I don't expet Linux to ever succeed on the desktop. It was a mess 10 years ago and it's still a mess, with very little improvements in the mean time, instead a lot of useless reinvention of the wheel.
lets face facts, yesterday, I was thinking, did the nvidia driver install or not? so where do I open to find such information? the 10,000 line x.org log file in /var/log or do I open a control panel and find it inside the monitor section? nope! cause it's not stated.
so it's 2012 and yet I have no fucking idea what graphics driver I am using yet windows 95 could tell me that, what is the colour depth of my screen? oh yes, but I can't find it in the monitor section, I need to open the nvidia setting graphics utility to find that, how can I turn off vsync? in the monitor section? wrong again, no I have to use some old utility that looks like it was build in the 90's by a programmer with autism.
fact is, linux is shit on the desktop and practically all of them are the same, they just try to mask it better than others, perhaps linux mint is the best desktop distro so I've heard, it's certainly better that debian, which rocket scientists have problems with.
let me iterate again, it's two thousand and fucking twelve and yet you bunch of clowns can't even get your shit together for long enough to write a fucking graphics/monitor dialog that might make me think you actually intentionally wrote a useful tool, as opposed to accidentally inventing regexp and thinking you're shit is done and time to go home.
pulseaudio? are you fucking serious?? I have two fucking speakers in my computer, if you can't get pulseaudio to work with hardware which has been around for the best part of a decade, you're a moron, you claim your software is technicall better than anything else, yet in practice it's shite and barely works even at the best of times, yesterday I found on some obscure forum that if I open the default configuration for pulse audio and change some enumeration value with an extra ,0 or ,1 or ,2 depending on the enumeration index in my computer it'll play sound, HOORAY FUCKING HALLELOUGYAH! (or however you spell it, lets go grammer nazi's!!)
why you guys are all circle jerking each other over wobbly windows, or the latest opengl 3d desktop cube touch screen intuitive desktop interface of the future you're house is on fire, windows 95 beats your ass into the ground in terms of simplicity and basic tools that nobody has even had the balls to say "fuck open source, you do it my way of the highway" and actually make a system which works, is reliable and actually won't screw up the next time I hit the "install updates" button
can you imagine the shit microsoft would take if installing updates blue screened a bunch of computers, yet that shit happens all the fucking time thanks to the beauty of linux, where even simple things are made impossible. I did it the other day, I upgraded my desktop, when I rebooted, unknown boot device, AWESOME!!! THANKS GUYS!! please walk in front of a bus, remove yourself from the genepool cause I'll be fucked if I recommend any of your shit to anybody whilst you can't even tell me the graphics driver I am using whilst inside x.org and without typing in something that looks like my cat just jumped on the keyboard...
seriously, you want to know why? it's because you guys are a bunch of clowns, thats why....
I used to think that I loved the cli (I _flew_ in MS-DOS), but initial attempts at using Linux shells almost gave me a nervous breakdown - a CASE SENSITIVE command line, for god's sake? Good damn luck with that; speed is NOT an option.
Where do I put the damn files? How do I get there? How do I find out? Why do none of the naming conventions seem to make any sense, and why is it so hard to track down what I need? The Linux filesystem seems to be an accommodation to the hardware shortcomings of 40-year old PDPs or somesuch, and it doesn't appear to have occurred to anyone to rationalize it.
A big thumbs-up to the Linux kernel - but every other aspect of it needs a thorough reaming. (Yeah...that'll make me popular.)
Windows 7 does not have malware issues if you have the latest service packs and updated mixed with up to flash and a good anti virus suite.
When Linux users and Mac users complain about Windows they remember the last time they ran XP SP 1 with IE 6 with all the good malware. Or there employer is behind the times because the cost accountants love their IE 7 only apps and refuse to upgrade their infrastructure.
Windows 7 for consumers is simple, easy to use, and fairly secure unless they do stupid things like install OMG Titties apps, and bizaare trojan Facebook games. Not perfect but I ran to Linux 10 years ago because Windows 98 was a POS. Windows XP was much better I may add but it had too many things run on ring 0 and IE 6 was terribly insecure with too many services and attack vectors.
The appeal for Linux for me was free C/C++, php, editors, and I can make the gui look whatever I wanted. Ethereal was awesome (now called wireshark), and it was frankly fun. Joe six pack doesn't need these.
MacOSX is even better. It has less malware, a great gui, less quirky, and graphically ahead of most cheap wintel garbage on the shelves of best buy with the terrible dark screens. It is unix for consumers.
I see no reason for Joe six pack to use anything but MacOSX or Windows. He watches movies, types things for work, browses the internet, and maybe makes a home movie or a nice mp3 collection for his player if he is an advanced user and that is it. Linux does these things worse as in more effort. MP3 support is not enabled by default, his advanced excel macros from work may not work with OpenOffice, Firefox and Chrome update often when the distro has no updates available, and flash sucks goatballs in Linux.
Linux has its strengths for nerds. Consumers have different priorities. If you hate Windows the Mac is a nice alternative abiet a pricy one.
http://saveie6.com/
...I'm afraid it's a valid concern. Not because of anything you said, but because Microsoft really does pay shills to post at places like this and pose as a regular person. It's not just Microsoft either, as this is a very common marketing tactic nowadays. We have no choice but to be skeptical of anyone who says anything positive about a product from a large corporation. That's not to say that all positive comments about products from large corporations are automatically the output of paid shills, but as a community we should be immediately skeptical of such things.
In a perfect world, corporations would not use this tactic, and thus we could immediately dismiss the "yer a shill" accusations whenever they come up, unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world. We live in this world. Any such positive statements must be treated with skepticism.
The difference is in the validity of the arguments, and in this case, I happen to agree with yours.
I have played around with Ubuntu a little bit and I really dislike Linux. If a piece of software gets updated. In most cases, I can't just go to its website and download the new version. I have to learn how to compile the program and install it, which most of the time never works correctly. Or wait days, weeks, or months for someone to compile the new version and add it to the database so I can use the update feature build into Linux. If I somehow manage to compile and install a software or driver the damn thing stops working the next time I do a system update. Then you have the problem with devices not being supported. Windows, while not perfect, does manage things 100 times better then Linux does. If your happy with the stock crap that comes with Linux. Then Linux is great. If you want to do something different then what they give you. Then Linux is the worse thing ever made. This is why Windows wins. I think Linux should be tossed out the window and everyone come up with something new. Something that is easy to manage like windows is and shit doesn't break.
It has no advertising at all and windows runs all of people's old applications which allow them to avoid buying new software.
Windows comes with pretty every store-bought computer. So for many people, it's all they've ever used. And when any new computer they buy is going to have it too, why bother learning anything else? Schools and workplaces don't want to go through the trouble of teaching people to use something else, so they stick with what everyone already knows.
But, I think this is changing. The other day I was pleasantly surprised to realize the computers at my local library were running Ubuntu. Many kids today are familiar with multiple OSes - they not only use Windows on desktops, but Android or IOS on phones, the DS or PSP interfaces, and play many games with interfaces so complicated they are like learning to use a new OS. Kids today are learning how to actually use computers unlike the last generation which learned how to use Windows. So as these kids grow up and get jobs, there's going to be a lot more workplaces comfortable with using Linux. The issue with using it in schools right now is training the teachers, but that will change as the kids of today become teachers, if not sooner.
This article combines cost to an average user and cost to a company in ways that are misleading. For the average user,: yes, the first savings is only that of $50. But I've never paid for Linux, neither updates nor upgrades to a whole new version. With Windows, you get updates free - though not for an unlimited amount of time - and then eventually you must pay for an upgrade if you want to stay current. Often Windows updates require more and more resources until the computer is not powerful enough to run the OS anymore, and many of the upgrades aren't optional or your software won't work without having the latest Windows update. When an upgrade comes out, you almost always need to upgrade your computer. Oh, and you'll get viruses galore if you don't keep Windows updated. I've never had those problems with Linux. So yes the initial savings is $50... but a couple of years down the line, Linux will really show the savings.
They didn't mention the prices of the alternatives to those open source software: Photoshop will run you $700, Microsoft Office $100 - $200. But you can use OpenOffice and GIMP on Windows too, so that's kind of irrelevant.
As for companies: They probably aren't buying things at that $50 difference, so I don't know how much savings is there. Upgrading Windows is much more work than upgrading Linux in my experience, and with Windows it usually means work has to stop for awhile, while I haven't seen the same thing with Linux. The cost of the extra work of upgrading and the lost production while work is stopped would have to be considered. I understand that Microsoft releases updates mostly at a scheduled time and therefore work stoppage can be scheduled, but I'd guess there is still some effect. I know that companies get discounts for Windows upgrades, but I don't know any specifics about that and how they compare to Linux corporate plans. I do know, however, that there are Linux distros that are completely free even for corporations, and the only cost of upgrading would be to have someone do the upgrade (if it isn't feasible to have the employees do it themselves) - which, again, is easier to do than with Windows.
. "A typical thing in a Windows setting is to establish some usage policies, and set up some limitations on the systems to keep them stable. Linux doesn't have those types of standards out of the box." That's bullshit. Linux has much more efficient ways to set limitations than Windows. With Windows it's everything or nothing, with Linux I can set each specific user to have access only to certain parts of something, and can change it much more easily than I can on Windows.
Commercial software that is only available for Windows is really the only valid point in this article, but really, how many people at the company need to use that specific software? And how many people that don't need the special software end up getting viruses and etc. and taking up time and money when IT has to fix their computer?
...it's nearly impossible to edit your HD video from your phone or camera on Linux. Seriously, I tried Openshot, which can't export h.264 with sound. I tried Cinelerra, which can't import .mov's. I tried 'em all within the past few months. I can't remember what all the issues were with each program, but it turned out to be impossible. For the record, I'm an avid Ubuntu user. I've tried to get some of my friends into Ubuntu (since it is quite user friendly), but this video editing problem is the big blocker. Otherwise, they find it easy & secure... even with a small learning curve of having to learn new habits. I got my 80 year old Dad using Ubuntu tho. Yay! He doesn't do any video editing though.
Linux is widely used on the desktop, in education, software development, and various other markets. It hasn't displaced Windows, but it's one of the three big desktop operating systems. If you just look at desktops, there is probably more Linux systems than OS X systems.
I think Linux will continue to grow steadily on the desktop. The big problem is really laptops, but even that is getting better.
Because it sucks.
https://plus.google.com/102150693225130002912/posts/1vyfmNCYpi5
If Linus Torvalds says he can't cope with a fairly popular and mainstream distro which is supposed to be one of the friendlier ones how can anyone else be expected to cope with any of them? And this is but the tip of the iceberg.
Now you may down vote me for challenging your precious world view.
That ship has sailed and its never coming back. Save for the hobbyist minority, most other users don't care about any of the selling points of a Linux Desktop Operating System.
Tell them its free, and they will tell you they didn't "pay" for Windows and that it came with their PC. Even if this is a load of crap, they don't know the difference. Some of them will even ask you what Windows is, or what an operating system is. I hear this lots from all age groups since many people just don't care how it works.
Tell them they can customize it and there's many choices, and they'll tell you they just want to check their email and write up their reports.
Tell them there is games, and they'll argue they can't play Skyrim. Tell them they can play Skyrim with Wine, and they'll tell you its too complicated.
Your average PC user wants consistency, and that's either going to be Windows or Mac. This is especially notable in the area of people who know just enough about computers for work purposes. The only people who I have ever convinced to try Linux are those with dated hardware that don't want to run XP but can't run Vista or Windows 7.
Simple use case on this reason...neighbor gives me ancient laptop with Win ME on it. Asks if I can get it going, in any way, so that they can wirelessly connect to something. Install linux (piece of cake), dig out old wireless PCMCIA card, and start wading through countless pages of command line instructions which may or may not work, frequently accompanied by comments such as, "If you haven't spent 3 days trying to install it yourself, WE'RE not going to help you!".
Meanwhile, an old $200 system with Windows lets you stick a wireless card or USB card in and, at worse, download a new driver.
I think it was 2007. Linux was taking off all over the place. Governments were talking about adopting open standards. Schools and municipalities were deploying Linux. You could see it really starting to take hold.
Microsoft's no stupider than everybody else. They could see it, too. And I seem to remember they dropped the price on Windows to $3. (That was on whichever version was old, but still dominant at the time. XP?) Not in the US, but elsewhere, where the danger was highest. Then they also really, really, really pushed to prevent adoption of open standards and, if that wasn't possible, to water those standards down to something that interfered less with their business model.
And, as far as I can see, they've successfully held back the tide that time.
Which isn't to say that the problems with Linux people have identified upthread aren't right. They are. Linux does have problems with lack of advertising and sudden holes where important stuff ceases to work. That is very important and something we really need to get our act together about. But the real problems shouldn't blind us to the equally real problems that have nothing to do with Linux itself.
I think he said it best. Linux on the Desktop will never happen because Mac came along.
Before OS X, many many people were dying for a Desktop OS that looked beautiful but still gave them their beloved UNIX-style command line and familiar tools (emacs, vi, gcc, etc.). They wanted a UNIX-style OS which had drivers that actually worked instead of requiring wastage of huge amount of time googling this and compiling that.
OS X came along and fulfilled the wish of many. The only people left were those who wanted a UNIX-style OS that was libre; that was a vanishingly small number compared to the first group, whose desires were more than adequately fulfilled by OS X.
http://slashdot.org/story/07/10/11/1527219/rob-malda-answers-your-questions
I was an absolute newcomer to the linux world. I knew about it, but never had it on any of my PC's. I decided to go with Ubuntu 11.10 32-bit version. I planned to use it on a HTPC with XBMC. I had problems from the very beginning - never really understood the terminal commands. (A very simple tutorial would have probably gone a long way.) Sound didn't work, but finally found the correct way to install the drivers for my motherboard. After attempting to install some drivers for a USB webcam as well as recommended updates I wasn't able to boot up. Even safe mode isn't available and getting to the BIOS isn't an option either. There are a bunch of lines of text which seem to be checks, the last one says [OK] but it just freezes. After all the problems, I would NEVER recommend it to a user like myself.
I've been using a desktop Linux distro (PC LinuxOS) for several years and love it. But I still need Windows - not just for the occasional game - but because none of the following run well or at all under Linux: Netflix (requires Microsoft Silverlight plugin with DRM) ITunes (No native version available. May work under Wine but poorly) Skype (Video mode problems) Amazon mp3 downloader (Linux versions available but PITA dependency issues)
There is a really old saying, "Linux is free if your time is worth noting." The summary states that Linux is easier to use than ever, but this isn't actually true today. Back in 1991 a distro had a limited set of utilities and was pretty straightforward to install and use. Now, there are several DVDs, a myriad of configuration options, hundreds of configuration files (that change constantly as new versions of software are released) that it is mind boggling to keep track of.
And, there are enough random made up names for the thousands of different pieces of software to make you sick to your stomach. Also, unrelated to these problems, video games need to be targeted at the platform to drive interest. People are always keeping a Windows partition around still for games. And, as a kid, games are what initially got me interested in the PC and eventually led to my interest in art, writing, programming, etc.
Not too long ago there was research conducted at a University, though I can't recall where, that discovered people make more comfortable decisions when provided with fewer choices. Adding more than three choices simply causes unnecessary stress on the participant.
To solve the problems Linux has on the desktop, I think that what we really need is a distro that does the following:
1) Forks or re-brands a small selection of the most important and popular pieces of open source software available under alternate names that make sense. For example, if this fictitious distro was called Precision, then various programs for it would be called; Precision Paint, Precision Office, Precision Publisher, Precision 3D, Precision Notes, Precision Software Center, Precision Media Player, Precision Media Center, Precision Developer, Precision Update, Precision Chat, etc. This would create a sense of unity among the platform and ease frustration users have in decided what to run to accomplish various tasks.
These are far better names than the assorted mishmash of things like; Gimp, Pinta, LibreOffice, Vim, Emacs, Scite, Leafpad, Geany, GEdit, Abiword, Inkscape, Blender, Tomboy, Zim, GTG, Totem, GStreamer, VLC, , QtCreator, MonoDevelop, Anjuta, Eclipse, Pidgen, etc. You might suggest Qt/KDE does this, but they don't really have a strictly defined rule like I'm suggesting for naming, so they have things like Qt Creator and KDevelop, Konquerer, etc. which all break that naming rule of making it obvious what the application does and ties it to a single brand. Even Microsoft and Apple sometimes break this rule themselves, and it adds to confusion when they do. And, there would have to be exceptions for 3rd party software like the upcoming Steam for Linux, which is trademarked and can't be renamed.
The key would be to settle on one product for each feature, though. Including more than one text editor should be discouraged. It should be up to the user if they wish to download additional software beyond what is provided and it should be clear it's separate 3rd party supported applications in the software center and not part of the main distribution. The distribution itself should contain a small set of very powerful pieces of software that have been customized for the platform. Developers for the distribution would focus on only adding new features and fixes for those set of software. This would prevent from spreading their focus too thin among lots of packages.
It is worth noting that these applications would also have to visually match. And, if they do not already, then an attempt would have to be made to rewrite their visual design. Blender would be a good example of an application who's interface would and should change to fit with what users would expect.
2) Configuration files and options should be eliminated, reduced or hidden as much as possible. What I mean by this, is that if you look in the configuration path there should be a very small set of files. These files should be short, and any advanced configuration options beyond that could still be provided, but be placed in a deeper advanced
Linux won't became a desktop standard for one simple, unavoidable reason:
Because we (as in the users) want to use our computers to get what we need to done with the software with which we are familiar/have been trained on/are given to use. We do not want to administer our system/workstation(s) and go searching for the appropriate application(s) to mimic what we already know to work under Windows or OSX.
Ubuntu and Mint were a move in the right direction, but even still... far too much of the Linux environment and software is designed by and for IT enthusiasts and hobbyists. Far too much of it assumes a fairly deep knowledge of how both a computer and an operating system work under the hood. Far too many things still require just a "little tweaking" to get to work smoothly. Too many of the applications are geared around system management and maintenance. The list goes on and on.
I use Linux running in a VM at home when I need it. Some of what I need, I can run on either side. Some I absolutely need windows (financial software, Reference/Citation manager, etc), because truly comparable software isn't available on Linux. Most of my stats and some GIS, I do on the Linux side, for the same (reversed) reason.
The simple reason is that, to almost everyone that is not directly involved in IT - a computer is a tool or an appliance to get a task done. Nothing more. It is, quite often, an unpleasant and frustrating tool that seems to always be inconveniently temperamental at that... and that is just with the heavily supported, thoroughly developed, heavily investment backed commercial software! Perpetually developed, volunteer-based, "good enough if you squint" software on Linux scares the bejeebus out of people who can barely stand the stuff that's supposed to be "off the shelf" ready.
There is Windows 7.
I tried the latest consumer preview of Windows 8 on my desktop (6 core 2.6 ghz phenomII with 8 gigs of ram) and it was very fast and sleek. If it were not for Metro I would still be using it. I got used to it after a few days and it is workable on the desktop mode (still like Windows 7 search much better than goign to Metro every task).
Windows 7 will be the new obsolete dinosaur we all will love and or hate and battle on slashdot like we do with XP today on which is better. Businesses will switch to Windows 7 as it supports EFI and can run IE 10 and up to date browsers with full security (not have gimped like XP) with full hardware acceleration. Windows 8 will be a hit with tablets in the workplace.
My guess is a new hybrid environment will replace it. Linux is just not capable on the desktop and certainly not at work. Only really old and poor consumers still use XP. It is old and like old IE is reserved for the fortune 500.
http://saveie6.com/
I've been trying to implement Ubuntu on the workplace for some time now and most of the problems that people have with it are the result of their familiarity with Windows. People don't like change, especially when they don't see its benefits, and it's hard to make people that are almost IT illiterate to understand that taking away a tool that worked perfectly for something different, is a good move. They'll move and then every little problem that they stumble upon results in a lot of frustration because they could do their work faster without all the hassle of learning something new with something they had before.
Also, there are some specific things:
- Office. With the change to LibreOffice comes complaints of documents not being shown the way they were made in Word. The need to understand the different file extensions. Some Thunderbird's quirks.
- Legacy in-house applications developed in a language that doesn't work on Linux.
- Games. This one is for home, obviously. The only reason I still have a Windows system is to play pc games. Maybe Valve can start changing that.
Linux isnt something most average users need, want or could easily use. Its that simple.
1) Lack of games. I play pc games so I dont give a shit about linux. Bottom line, if you want to play games from mainstream titles to indie titles you want windows because it plays it all. On the occasion you want to play a game you can sometimes do it by using another program to trick the game into running but it never runs perfectly and who wants to setup programs just to run other programs?
2) Lack of driver support. Sure there is hardware drivers out there but they arent released as often as windows and never as good.
3) Too many god damn versions of linux each with their own problems and quirks.
4) 3rd part software support sucks. Virtually every pc 3rd party software runs on windows while only a small percent runs on linux and when it does its usually outdated.
5) Linux isnt as commonly used or comfortable as windows. Even a pc novice has a good understanding of how windows works and how to navigate it to their needs because the interface, terminology and common uses are familliar to most people because windows has been around so long and most menus in even smart phones take a cue from what windows has been doing for awhile. So most normal people dont want linux because its not as comfortable to use.
6) Better hardware support. Keyboards, mice, gamepads, mics, sound cards, video cards, printers, motherboards, capture cards, ram disk cards, speciality devices, assitive aide devices and etc all run from windows in most cases without needing to get seperate drivers. Linux doesnt as easily or widely support periphals and hardware.
Linux has its uses and its fun to play with but at the end of the day it sucks for the majority of computer users. Most people want their pc to be easy to use, they dont want to always be looking for special drivers, finding ways of using programs on linux, learning a new OS, and always trouble shooting problems. Hell I am an advanced computer user and I dont even use linux because I can do more and I can do it better and easier on windows. Yes linux is free but sometimes the old addage, you get what you pay for, is very true.
Installation hell, bad GUIs, multiple desktop environments and toolkits, serious bloat, application installation nightmares, dependency hell, package management, multiple package formats, insane 1970s directory layout, continuous forced upgrades because in the Linux world 18 months is a "Long Time", unstable device driver API, daft gNames for Kapplications, zealotry that denies or seeks to minimize these problems, it goes on and on.
If somebody still can't see why Linux doesn't take off on the desktop then they're probably part of the reason why it is the way it is. I remember when it was "Will 1999 Be The Year Of Linux On The Desktop?". A decade on and things have not improved; in some respects, they've got worse, and they're not going to get better because the social process that produces Linux as a desktop operating system is dysfunctional and utterly broken.
They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. If we want a free software desktop operating system for the masses, we must accept it isn't going to come from this milieu.
"Most end users are too dumb/lazy/don't care (pick your favorite) to even begin to learn how to fish, you can try as many times as you want with any OS, it won't work, they want their fricking Fish Stick cooked for them instead of the delicious sole, just like some people prefer to go to McDonald instead of a true restaurant." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, @02:17PM (#39848005)
See subject, & result reply I quoted w/ a year++ of good results for a user.
(So, it doesn't mean folks don't try do it (CIS Tool makes it EZ is why)).
So much for THAT from "the trolling likes of you", because it's just "too, Too TOO EASY - just '2EZ'" to dispatch you with facts, especially those I used in my initial posting.
---
"please, stop spamming us with your pointless "guide", nobody reads it anyway ..." - by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, @02:17PM (#39848005)
100's of 1,000's have & since 1997 when I first began putting out security & speed/performance guides for Windows users (and the forums view counts show that easily).
Many even applied it, per the quoted result I noted above, & that's only 1 of many like it!
From folks in forums it was on saying it's good stuff, etc./et al, as well as forums ratings of it. "Regular JOE" type users usually too!
(Those ARE the folks to educate, not 'security pros' (many of whom I have flipped onto their ears on points they make or ones of mine they've tried to put down, OR MISTAKES THEY'VE MADE EVEN, over the years & recently even!)
Easy to "blow them away too", just as you are now, in your posting as "anonymous coward" with NO CLUE of who you are...
(You make it pretty obvious YOU DON'T WANT OTHERS AWARE OF SUCH GUIDES, & I would also say that makes you a malware-maker yourself on a guess & I'm not alone in those sentiments either... FAR from it!)
APK
P.S.=> So, "shooo" - Go away now, little troll... lol!
... apk
Not only that but another big turn off is that documentation often tends to be non-existent, incomplete, confusing, or simply wrong then, to make matters worse, when inexperienced users venture into the forums looking for guidance, the replies are usually along the lines of RTFM emphasized with varying degrees of condescension. Very rarely will you find a simple, clear set of instructions on how to perform a specific procedure. New users need hand holding but the Linux community will more often than not just throw them to the wolves.
While I agree about the dismal documentation, most average users couldn't give a damn about documentation. They don't even know that F1 == Help and wouldn't want to be bothered to read it even if they do know. They DO know that little Johnny next door is good with computers, and what else would he rather do with his time anyways?
Like when it's time to move they don't call the movers or the rental place, they call their buddy with the pickup truck that's tired of helping people move and even more tired of being asked. When you come over they just stand behind you with the immortal words of Phillip J. Fry, "Fix it, fix it fix it! (Waits 3 seconds) Fix it, fix it, fix it!"
Specifically, I used to recommend Ubuntu, but then some moron with influence hoisted Unity on to Ubuntu, and I can not in good faith recommend Unity to people I like.
Now I tell people to just get an Apple. You get a UNIX like OS, and you get a warranty. And while I think Mac's window manager is a bit simplistic for my tastes, it is worlds better than Unity.
Oh, is if Ubuntu would like to escort the idiot that chose Unity out the door, I'm happy to donate a torch and pitchfork to the mob running the person out of town.
*dons flame retardant jacket
Aside from the uncountable dists, ability to load on any piece of hardware created, including your toaster, and the free-as-in-beer cost of installing it, Linux on the desktop is something else entirely.
Linux on the desktop is the intersection of every political ideology, and economic theory that man has every created. It is Capitalist, yet Communist. Conservative, yet Liberal. Socialist, yet Fascist. All of these metrics come out in every dist available, yet retain none of their qualities at the same time.
But in reality, none of those delinations matters Why? Because the individual has the freedom of choice. THAT right there, is why it shatters every negative thrown against it, and why no amount of marketing will either destroy it, or lift Linux on the Desktop to a penultimate presence across the world.
I CHOOSE to use Linux. I CHOOSE to avoid Microsoft. I CHOOSE to avoid Apple. Name anything else tech. related in the world, be it software or hardware, that give you as much freedom as what Linux and its Distributions gives you.
Perhaps I think I use Linux for it's freedom, since it is something that we, the user and dev. community, have complete~ control of. The virtual, if you will, is the only true free space left. True Freedom*, in the physical reality, no longer exists.
I read these religious wars about Linux on the desktop and every time think it comes down to a couple things. 1) The Server world is not the Desktop world. In the server world, you have a only 4 main types of services (DB, Web, App, Middle tier) which all run on common frameworks, and can be ported across any OS type. 2) In the Desktop world, where are the big corporate supported, applications? Where is the Intuit Quicken? Turbo Tax? Adobe Photoshop? The apps have to be there, not some clone (which might be better) but no supported by a big corporation with no support but angry geeks when something goes wrong. Corporations need a neck to squeeze when the fit hits the shan and upper management pounces on IT because stuff broke. 3) People apply Server Logic to the Desktop world. The Desktop world needs thousands of apps, and needs 1000 ways to manage 1000 different situations. The server world can just run without doing anything different once you set it up. This is the difference.
Every time I try to integrate an open source library at work I end up pulling in a new license, and have to pass that new license through several legal departments to get everyone to agree that inclusion of the library is acceptable and doesn't conflict with any of the existing licenses or contracts, Open Source Licensing is also a pain in the ass.
That every single project decides it needs to slightly customize a standard contract makes everything difficult.
congratulations, you win the prize for the most moronic thing I heard all day..
Linux distros excel at many aspects of an OS that can, and probably should, be decided in a meritocracy style voting / debate process. These distros even have small lords that take it upon themselves to strongly influence some technical evolutions, going as far as blocking what they don't see fit and pushing for what they feel should occur.
However, all the areas where Linux has these strongholds are [very] technical. Especially in the wake of this "consumerization of IT" phenomenon that rides on a big wave of money, it has become of paramount importance to have an OS excelling in ease of use, fantastic user interfaces and overall smooth interaction with the average human being. Linux and free software in general has always been utter shit in these aspects. Everybody keeps asking why and I think everybody actually knows the root of the problem.
I'll illustrate it using an analogy with a work of art, something like a painting, a song, a poem or even some kind of complex and yet elegant mechanism. When true artists present such creations to the world, the world has no saying like "I don't like the 3rd verse, change it!" or "Maybe you should've used some yellow here! Redo it!". This is not how true works of art exist. The author assumes a certain position, creates something as a whole and then the world judges it as being overall good, great, crap, etc.
I think the same principle applies to human interaction layers in software. Great user interfaces are works of art. Their creators need to conceive something that is at the same time useful and yet it enchants your senses every time you use it. It must feel cohesive and yet it must handle all sorts of tasks that are not strongly related to each other. Worst of all, a great user interface for an OS needs to be tightly integrated with the code doing the heavy duty lifting in the background. Their creators need to assume a position on how various things are done and their creation should be judged as a whole.
Why are state of the art user interfaces missing from Linux? Because most creators of great works of art live their lives in the shadow of powerful sponsors that often profit greatly from financing the creator through their "wonder" years. There are no such sponsors in the Linux world. Every single developer of Linux software creates his own user interface as well as he can. The end result is like a giant wall of hand paintings made by 5 year olds. Cute, but clearly nowhere near work of art status.
This situation will not change until the open source / free software movements will figure out a way to finance artists and strongly integrate them with developers. It seems to me like an impossible task that can only occur in a classical style software company like Microsoft, Apple, etc. So I think Linux is doomed for a long time to run in the background, doing the heavy lifting on space stations, labs, devices and servers. Occasionally it will spawn a child that apparently is not retarded, like Android, but take a second look and you'll spot the root problems in no time.
In 2007, I switched to using Linux as my daily desktop and only use Windows for two very specific needs - which have nothing to do with anything I ever needed at **any** job I've had in 25 yrs.
Most call center employees should be switched to Linux.
Most office workers should be switched to Linux.
Most C-suite people should be switched to Linux too, but that will never fly and those are the people controlling the budgets. At companies where the CEO/CIO/CFO/CxO all want to switch, Linux becomes successful and saves money. An example: http://news.cnet.com/2008-1082_3-5065859.html
However, Linux isn't perfect for everyone. At my last job, my boss asked me to find a way to convert 20K end users to Linux. Sadly, these end users had highly specialized hardware requirements and today still use WinXP over driver issues. Drivers for Vista and Win7 do not exist. I did some quick calculations, knowing what we paid for Microsoft licenses (OS + full Office) and figured there would be no way to achieve any real savings due to the effort to rewrite all the different drivers to Linux.
There are lots of places where Linux doesn't make sense.
What needs to happen is the US Government needs to push Linux desktops internally, then mandate open formats for all contracts - no more .docx and .xlsx files.
That will allow smaller government contractors to take the risks and dump MS and Apple. They will need a different sort of desktop support, so small IT companies will become excellent at that support model. This will drive IBM, Dell, HP, Acer, Sony to all support pre-installed Linux desktops.
That will kill the FUD that MS and Apple push about the lack of support or lack of apps. Inside most companies, they use standard apps that are easily replaced by F/LOSS. Easily. I know. I've done it.
Over time, more and more Fortune 100 companies will hear about the Linux working well on desktops and migrate more and more of their internal users towards Linux.
Which distro? Doesn't matter, just stay with a big one - perhaps a top 10.
Every distro only 90 day trial to be free.
Then 25 bucks for the key.
If I put something on the curb with a sign fee no one wants it.
If I put the same thing with a sign 10.00 someone will steal it.
Get it.
Linux is really more like Windows 3.0, the real action with win3.0 was in DOS. The real action in linux is in the shell. All the GUI stuff is just pasted on top of it.
-- QED
I'm a brand new Linux user, and after some finessing via a Sub-Sub-distro, I landed on Lubuntu. However I'm sad to report that Ubuntu packages are not stable at all, and I've been burned by bugs bad a few times especially in the driver dept.
However I like LXDE, and if I have time some day I might look at XFCE too. But I agree priority one was to get off Unity.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Because there aren't advertisements for it.
Really. That's it. There are ads for Android, so people are drooling over Linux on phones, but there aren't any Ubuntu or RHEL TV ad spots.
It has nothing to do with advertising really but far more to do with the money the large OEM vendors get from Microsoft as part of their "Marketing Program". This money is out side of the licensing costs/deal but still tied to it. Microsoft pays vendors for putting those Windows stickers on the packing boxes, keyboards, and computer chasis along with logo's on the web pages and in the purchase literature. Lots of money.
And then there are the preloaded software kits companies like Adobe and others have contracts with the OEM's for so time-limited or entry versions of their software is installed on the computer already. The OEM's make money off that too.
I guess there is a 3rd primary reason too and that is the fact that Microsoft's _people_ will come knock on your door if you start putting Linux on some of your systems. They will smile, sit down with you, as an OEM, and place your existing licensing cost sheet down on the table and then ask if you think shipping Linux systems is really financially worth your while. Smiling, he'll say to think hard about it while tapping his finger on your existing cost sheet for the Windows OS license.
That's about it so even if customers ask about Linux, the vendors really can't put Linux on the systems unless they are the small fry guys and even then they'll probably talk you into putting it on with a 2nd disk or as a 2nd boot option on the same disk. The big guys can not cut off all that marketing money and reloaded software money when that is where they make their profits from.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Try printing an A3 pdf in landscape. It might work for you. If you are using a system for work it needs to work. If it is a toy for home it is ok to mostly work. I used to be a linux zealot. Then I "got" to use one a my main work PC. My productivity dropped off by perhaps 50%.
Have you ever considered the possibility, that some people might not want Desktop Linux to take off. But not for the reason you would think. See, if everybody started using desktop Linux, then, just like what has happened with MacOS X, malware will start appearing for it in ever increasing numbers. Lots of Linux users I know use it as a safe haven from Windows and all it's malware. I don't think they want to see that haven suddenly infested, and have to do something like switch to a different distro every few months/years/etc in order to keep their haven...
Macs are great for small businesses. Less malware prone than Windows (though Linux still wins here), built-in non-crappy warranty service at the Apple store (handy if you live near one), employees are familiar with them already, employes generally like working with them (free morale), and Time Machine is handy for automated backup. You can put graphic design, sales guys and developers all on the same platform, assuming you're not developing for Windows.
Windows - search google for program, download it, double click it, accept spyware, malware, good to go.
linux - search google for program, download rpm file, download it, double click it....nothing rpm's are not for ubuntu
-search google again for a dpk file, download file, double click it, "missing lib.xxx.xx"
-search google for lib.xxx.xx, find a tutorial to use apt-get
open a command prompt
apt-get program'
invalad command
apt-get install program
you must be root to do that
sudo apt-get install program
bunch of stuff happens do you want to install all this stuff?
yes
installs > complete.
run the config process
cd some dir
you must be root to do that
sudo ./configure
you must be root to do that grr
sudo bash
cannot find ./program
reboot > install windows
If you don't want to use GNU/Linux, fine. Don't use it. Also, who gives a rat's ass if the general public uses it or not? I certainly don't. Linux is self-sustaining. There are companies that make enviable incomes maintaining, supporting, and extending it. Young computer scientists cut their teeth developing it. Plenty of people use it, as do plenty of companies. Any company with vast armies of servers would be foolish to use anything other than Linux. In practice, you have to justify why you would use Windows and its huge licensing burden, the absolute opacity of its code (and of the commercial apps you'll most likely be running), and your complete dependence on others for code fixes. An average Linux user probably doesn't fiddle much with the code, but companies running tens or hundreds of thousands of boxes certainly will. Who can wait for months or years to get a bug fixed?
The Linux desktop is fine. It is a subjective choice like any other, but many people use it all day every day with no major problems. We all have apps that only run on Windows or Mac so, oh well, you also have to have a box or two to allow that. Computers are cheap enough these days that most households have two or more computers lying around already anyway. Most likely, even your elderly Aunt Tilley.
This is a dead controversy. Nobody gives two shits about it, except people who have nothing better to do than yak yak yak about pointless topics. The year of the Linux desktop came and went without anyone noticing. It's hard to say when it even was, actually, but it is in the fog of the past.
Windows 8 has not yet been released. Having XP sp3 out and stable for so long, lulled users into a false sensation of security. Just wait until 8.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
Yeah, the average person is going to think that's a statue you'd find in a garden doing something amusing.
And I'm happy to report that between netbsd and linux it's all we run.
To be fair, we permit inidividual use of mac os x (lesser evil for staff using their own hardware) but have been winblows free since 1992.
Since those ingloriousbastard days the scope of the business extends from hardware manufacturing to event management... so you can venture a safe bet that it's not important what industry you're in.
And for the overly avaricious ... yup, we also build our own cnc machines.
There are many good ideas in the posts and I couldn't agree more in most cases. I would like to add one more point: - What is different in a 2008 edition of a distro from a 2012 edition? Besides some eyecandy, practically nothing. The basic linux desktop experience is good enough. (At least it was in 2008, I'm not sure it still is since gnome3...). People who develop the distros should work on other projects like many of you mentioned above like: MS Office compatibilty, Game/steam compatibilty, Skype/sound issues, bluetooth, fonts, and many more functions, which is considered solved, but not really works reliably OUT-OF-THE-BOX. Those are not core functions of an OS, but without those the OS is useless. And the sad thing: None of these are even in the OS roadmaps, because "with extensive hacking, those can work with some compromise". Really, that's the best linux can offer? Looking back for 10 years of developmnet the answer is sadly YES.
I run Windows 7 and Ubuntu 12.04 in a dual-boot configuration. I haven't even tried Windows 8 and have no desire to do so. Being a web developer, however, affords me the luxury of multiple choices when it comes to OS selection and usage. At my day job, I use Mac OS X, mainly because that's the only option. At home, as mentioned, it's Windows and Linux; Windows for gaming and media intake (movies, music, etc.), and Linux for my personal programming and web dev projects. Looking at Windows 8 on the horizon, I've also wondered what will happen when it finally drops. It's a major shakeup on the Windows desktop, for sure, which is why I will continue using my current config for as long as possible and, when I can no longer run Windows 7, I'll probably just switch to Linux full-time. OS X and iOS are great platforms, but I really don't want to spend the money for the hardware costs associated with adopting Mac for my desktop needs.
Sorely lacking in integration with current Enterprise. Face it, most people get their primary exposure to computers in their workplace. If it does not have complete integration/Replacement of existing Server 2008R2 Active Directory & Group Policy it wont fly. GP allow IT to assign resources (disk space, networked printer, applications) and lock them down so the luser cant fiddle with and break the sanctioned setup. The lengths they will go to to work around restrictions so they can SEE THE DANCING BUNNIES must be seen to be believed. It needs automated tools/samples to migrate existing A lot of it is out there in bits and pieces (many of which are not free, so there is a budget hurdle, as well). SAMBA4 is not ready for Group Policy yet, no app for editing it (you have to MS tools) and the replication of the system directory hierarchy between AD global catalogs has not been created yet. It appears to work well enough for a single site/domain deployment, but has a ways to go before it will support a forest & multi-site environment.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
1. The instant anything goes wrong, you're back on the command line.
2. There remains the expectation in the Linux community that ANY person using a computer should be required to have syadmin-level skills before they're allowed into the Internet. 3. You can't do a good user interface for users whom you hold in contempt. Many Linux developers hold ordinary people in contempt. See (2) above.
4. GUIs like KDE and Gnome have a lot in common with Microsoft BOB: the belief that if something is difficult, make the fonts and buttons bigger and that makes it all OK.
5. User interface design is hard, but Linux developers don't believe that; anything that requires a GUI more complex than "man myprogram" (or, if you want to be Stallmanishly Correct, "info myprogram") is obviously unimportant and a waste of good developer time best spent elsewhere. Getting kinda close should be "good enough". See (2) above.
6. User interfaces are all about polish and smoothness. But, like any open source project, once the sexy bragworthy stuff is done (core functionality, edge cases and exception-handling NOT included), interest in putting in the effort to refine and tweak just isn't there. There's nobody to crack the whip and say "it's NOT okay that scrolling is jumpy if there's a large JPEG embedded in the document". In other words, there's no recognition that core functionality is the first 90% of the effort, the second 90% is robustness/exception-handling, and the third 90% is polish and tweaking. With most open-source projects, you're lucky if you get past the first 90%, and by the time you're on the third 90%, all your devs have wandered off into Skyrim.
This may sound harsh and snide, but it has the property of being true.
Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
Oh, Peter, my love, I missed these little skirmishes of ours so much lately.
Were you busy spamming some other websites with your evilness ?
Also, be careful, you called me a malware-maker, that's libel you know, I can sue you for that (and I'm not alone in those sentiments either... FAR from it!)
Your Precious
First of all, most IT staffers don't know anything about it, at least from my experience. Some like I have experimented at home, but not everyone brings stuff like that home with them. They have all heard of it of course, but if they don't have to use it they don't. And really for good reason, as many point out, there are 100 different distro's out there, all with little differences. Heck even if a company could pick one, and nail it down to make it standard for support and compatibility, you have the issue of lack of software, games for home, or applications for work. Sure for basic use it would be fine, but how many OS to you want to support in your org. Anyway it is not nearly there by a long shot...
However things seems to be converging. Android which is basically Linux is making BIG inroads into both phones and tablets. Both phones and tablets are becoming more powerful and more computer like everyday. Linux already had a brief appearance in consoles before Sony pulled a Sony. However there seems to be word of Valve entering the game, and with Linux support to boot (pardon pun), so I have to sort of assume that they might be going that route perhaps, if they indeed do. So now you have phones, tablets, and desktops all converging. You also have had linux and android into the netbooks when they were popular. You also see various big players starting to converge their OS, Apple with their iOS5 and Microsoft with Windows 8.
So yes I do see a time with Linux desktop, but it won't win by beating competitors at the desktop game. It will slide in sideways as devices converge.
I was first exposed to Linux when you had to be a programmer to complete an installation. I remember having to do manual configuration on graphics drivers to support my monitor. All of this was a major headache when all I wanted was a Unix platform to program on.
But, as has been posted numerous times, there needs to be a single Linux distro standard that app developers can build on. Let all the hobbyists/developers/researchers use their own custom flavors. I love Linux and I'd never touch it as a desktop platform.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Yes, the look and feel is that different. You and I might prefer Ezri Dax, but the vast majority of the public prefers Pamela.
When I visit my family, my mom closes the lid of my laptop and I freak out. "Why don't we just buy you a real computer?" they ask.
I've owned 3 laptops in the last 4 years, and suspend/resume fails to work (in ubuntu) on any of them out of the box.
and much more often than was the case 10 years ago, it just plain doesn't work in one way or another—social, technical, legal, or otherwise—usually in non-predictable ways and instances.
Windows, for all its non-workiness, remains more predictable in the ways that it won't work, meaning that it's more realistic for production desktop use.
Mac OS is more predictable still, and has a smaller, simpler ecosystem.
I used Linux for 16 years and wrote six Linux books. Then I got tired of feeling as though my operating system was one of the focuses of my life. But if it wasn't a focus of my life, it didn't continue to work. So I switched to Mac OS, which is infinitely more boring and forgettable. And that, for me, turned out to be great, now that I am not just an adult but edging toward early codgerhood.
I want to do stuff with my computer. Not do stuff to my computer.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
All the problems people grouse about with Linux on the desktop exist on Mac and Windows. You can find 100 pieces of hardware that won't work out of the box and require tweaking, newer drives, etc. on all of them. You can find another 100 that work on all out of the box.
Wave a wand so that Linux has 80+ percent of the desktop share instead, and people will bitch about how Windows has the problems they pin on Linux today. "My built in motherboard card didn't work without tweaking/driver." Yeah, I just built a media center PC with new components. I put Windows 7 Ultimate on it, since it will be a Netflix box. I spent ~20 minutes waiting for the OS to install and another 30+ installing drivers and plugins and whatever.
Most users don't deal with that shit because they buy a laptop from Dell or HP who does it for them. They can do the same with Linux and the user would never know. Except they don't, because MS strong armed them into loading Windows for years and now no one gives a rats ass to use anything else. For them "it just works", when really "it just works" because Dell and HP did the work for them.
Google has banned Windows internally except in situations where a business critical app requires it; Mac or Linux only otherwise. I know of dozens of small companies that are purely Linux (many of them are not involved in dev or IT) It can be done and done well. It's just buying the licenses and installing it is seen as "easier."
You know what: until you get beyond a certain point, it is. At one small company, we had 30 Windows users, I made disk images with various software loads and updated them every 6 months. Later, I worked on a huge SCCM deployment project to manage a universities desktop computers (comp labs and offices, ~5/k machines) and it was a fucking nightmare, because Windows is a horrible network OS. Meanwhile, the UNIX team hardly touched their networked machines thanks to a robust and relatively easy to deal with Puppet setup (including various addons).
Windows is better because it's everywhere and people are use to it and really it works well most of time. Linux is not as ubiquitous, but also can be made to work well most of the time. This argument is rarely based on technical merits and typically devolves into opinion and preference. And Macs are only used by douche bag hipsters :P
No sig for you!!
Can we, please, stop posting fake "complaints" and "explanations" that come from Microsoft, and serve no purpose other than FUD-mongering and misdirecting the Linux development?
Should I remind everyone that Microsoft's settlement terms after (mostly toothless) antitrust lawsuit expired recently, and Microsoft is now free to continue their monopoly-maintenance practices such as "taxing" manufacturers' devices with non-Microsoft OS, without even trying to conceal them?
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
If one of them would just do it right in the first place. A lot of the perpetual forking/competing standards comes in places where nobody is doing a decent job, there isn't a solution that works. Like the sound situation. It is a complete mess, there's competing standards which have different problems and so on. That is because none of them worked well in the first place. Had there been a sound standard that did its job and provided a good way of interfacing sound play requests from apps with sound drivers, it'd be the one that was used either exclusively, or in 99.9999% of cases.
However there never was any of that, it was always a bunch of crap, so now we have a bunch of competing crap and none of it does the job right so there keeps being the competition.
The Darwin approach doesn't work well for these things, particularly things like sound where you have to start talking APIs. You really need the creationist approach: Some power on high needs to intelligently design the thing from the ground up. You need to spend time, a lot of it, designing a good API and set of standard, considering how everything will need to play and work together, document it well and freeze it so there aren't random changes later. Then you set about implementing it well.
Anyone who says they don't know which version to recommend is a troll.
That's my official stand.
If you're using Linux, and you wanted to introduce a friend to Linux, then it's only natural you'd recommend the distro you run. Since you'll be supporting it. Or a user-friendly Linux in the same "family", and is well known.
For desktops, there's: Ubuntu, RH, SuSE, and Mint at or near the top. All offering slight differences, and most from different "families".
Then of course there is DistroWatch.
Any Linux user worth his/her salt knows these things.
The BS that "there are over 100 distros, what do I recommend?", whining is disingenuous. There are over 100 different makers of golf clubs, which do I recommend. There are over a 100 different restaurants in my area which one do I recommend? Etc. As PJ would say, puh-lease!
My wife is a total PC illiterate, and yet she has no problem using a Linux desktop. Then of course you have all those millions using Linux in smartphones and what not. Linux, in my opinion is way more user-friendly than Windows. On several list I belong to which are geek oriented (mostly old people searching genealogy), I am constantly reminded of how useful Linux is, by calls fro help from Windows users. Those of us on the list using Macs and Linux offer help to get them to a point where they can get close to the same functionality out of Windows, that is just a no-brainer in Linux or Macs. Ever tried printing to a file, and having a usable (ie can open in an OTS app) in Out-of-the-Box Windows? I can't be done. You get [filename].prn. PRN? WTF? Where's the PDF print? Oh you have to buy something to get that.
Besides, the market isn't in Desktops anymore. That is so 20th Century. The future is portables, which has, umm..., no real Windows footprint. It's all Apple and Linux baby. So KDE and Gnome better get their shit together, and get ports done. Like yesterday.
There is no easy way to make greeting cards on Linux. About all you can do is use Open...um, Libre Office's drawing program and start manually laying out the page. With Microsoft Publisher, I could click a template and have a basic card ready to go in seconds. If the average consumer can't make a greeting card, or do taxes locally on the box (not upload sensitive info to an online site), and so on - Linux will not work on the desktop. The only role I see for it on the desktop is for people like me who have to run server-ish stuff (DB2, tomcat, etc) on a development machine.
Works fine for everyone but you.
And it doesn't work for you because you never used Linux in the first place.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
In the last few months I've done several linux installas and several windows 7 installs. I've seen all kinds of weird issues with the windows 8 boxes, and I haven't had an Ubuntu installation issue in . . . well, ever. Unity is stupid and now I can't recommend Ubuntu because of it, but mostly I can't recommend it because everyone seems to love rebooting and dealing with all kinds of malware. Linux isn't any harder than anything else any more, it's just that everyone already knows how to solve billion problems windows generates on a daily basis, and is content to have their system lock up or run super slow periodically - they think it's just the way things work. As long as games aren't an issue, linux would be better for almost everyone. As long as people are obstinate about it, it won't matter anyway. Linux's main problem is marketing now - technically (especially for casual home use) it's been at least as good as it's competitors for a long time.
When you choose what product you're going to use, there's invariably a whole bunch of things being considered. Yes, cost is one of them, but 9 times out of 10 it's actually pretty low down the priority list.
Let's consider small businesses for the time being, because they're the bulk of employers. Businesses that don't have an IT department, or if they do it's a single technician who may or may not have some sort of outside company to fall back on. Their priority list includes:
- Can we get support? (In plain English: If we want to find someone who can set this up for us and provide ongoing management, will we be able to simply pick up the yellow pages and call the first company we find? Or ask around friends and relatives to find someone?)
- Can we do our work? The instant there's one proprietary Windows app involved, you have a problem. It only takes one business-critical Windows app to kill Linux on the desktop stone dead; Wine is a non-starter because even if the app seems to work, telephone calls to the vendor for support will fall on deaf ears even if the problem demonstrably has nothing to do with Wine. Most of these proprietary apps are stupendously expensive - but they integrate so many business processes that migrating off them is even more stupendously expensive.
- Can we manage it centrally? ("Manage centrally" is a little bit more than just LDAP; I'm talking Active Directory equivalence wherever possible).
- Does it work with our existing hardware? (Believe it or not, there are large expensive printers out there that are WinPrinters).
- Where we have to interact with others, can we do so? (Yes, there are still IE-only web apps out there, and they're often found in something provided by franchisors to their franchisees, so even smaller businesses can be IE-dependent).
Cost is on the list, but if the answer to any of the above is "no", then finding some way of making it work will only happen if the cost is absolutely stratospheric.
Installing 10.04 Ubuntu LTS is just a matter of popping in a CD and running the installer for 30 mins on typical hardware. Software install and updating works like a breeze via Synaptic.
So I call your post FUD.
Companies are run by accountants and flunkies who are afraid of it
Linux developers aren't on board with the PR that asserts that everything is shifting to social media based.
PC vendors make it difficult to procure hardware w/o an OS preinstalled.
Senior Executives given the responsibility over IT all use whatever they like and that's currently an iPhone an iPad and an Ultrabook
as Windows does, and everyone knows Windows. Zorin is by far the most Windowsy flavor of Ubuntu. To make it or some other distro work, several things have to happen:
1) It has to look like "out-of-the-box" Windows. Nobody gives a rat's ass about "changing the desktop paradigm." They want what they know.
2) Installs have to work the same way as they do on Windows. Installing on Linux is just different enough to be annoying, and believe it or not, there's a universe of software that isn't on the internet. Software doesn't begin and end on the software center. Oh, and by the way, there are still a few of us who are regularly beyond the reach of an internet connection.
3) Make the disk and file system look like Windows, with drives that have aliases like "c:" an "d:" and a copy of something that looks like Windows explorer. It doesn't matter if it's stupid. It's what people are used to.
4) Wine has to be nearly perfect and auto-configuring. Sorry, but if Word doesn't run, your chances are "none."
None of this is fair, sensible or rational. It's also true.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
At the place in which I was previously employed we were somewhat security conscious, to the point of DLP strategies etc. And most of us not only had our Windows boxes which were locked down, couldn't burn CD's, or mount USB sticks, etc., but we also had our choice of Linux distros on separate boxes.
So DLP - you simply SCP'd files to your linux box and then mounted a USB key or burned a disc from there.
It was also used to get around the web proxy. You'd just install Corkscrew on your Linux box and have it proxy your connections THROUGH their proxy to your remote server and then route all your web traffic through there. Completely bypass the proxy because the internal proxy couldn't inspect encrypted traffic.
Everytime I work myself up to switch to Linux I run into that "One" problem that makes me hesitate. This time its RAID0. I just purchased a new PC (very sweet hardware) and saw the Mint 12 distro announced here on slashdot right around the same time and took a look, downloaded the DVD and ran it on my new hardware from the disc. Very nice, it seemed to think the same way I do. And it ran faster from the DVD than win7 did from disk. Add in my total loathing for Win7 and it all sounds good right? Err... no. When I went to actually install, I got an error that seemed to say that it didn't recognize my RAID0 array, and not being a total geek wizard, I hesitated. It ended up taking me a few days to find a relevant forum, post a question and then sort the snide remarks from the helpful answers. I found the soluton, but by then I had lost the desire to tread in waters that were potentially too deep. So from my perspective, I really would like to switch, but every forum/site I found looking for help assumed that I had some level of basic understanding of Linux, it's file system, and how it's executables work. I don't. I'm a Windows Refugee and have been kept in the dark by big brother for many years. So for total newbies to the OS, there are not too many places to go where you can ask "stupid" questions, which is what all newbies need to do in order to learn. Too bad too, that damn OS was sweet, saw all my hardware(except the RAID0) hooked up to the network/internet with no questions or prompts and ran fantastically on the Dell i7-2600/16GB ram. Someday I'm gonna switch, promise.
"If the only tool that you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." Donny Rumsfeld
Every time I make a cd for a non-linux user, they always call me complaining that it crashed during install. I then have to explain that it's the graphics "saving" their screen, and to observe the install process, hit the shift key every 5 minutes. Then I have to walk them through telling X to NOT blank the screen. Leave screen blanking OFF by default, with an option to turn it ON.
In almost all distro's, X ignores the DE's power saving commands. Debian is the only one off the top that I've never had to tweak (and create) the X conf file, and it still blanks the screen during install.
A majority of them give up and go back to windows, who, at least in this case, gets it right.
Having to set the dpi for large displays manually kills linux as a HTPC for anything over 32". Sure you can set it manually, but to do that you have to connect it to a small display first. Windows get that right also.
Come on devs, it's 2012 and we still have these kind of problems?
Why is this do damn hard?
Cheers,
RM
Nobody's as dumb, as I appear to be
Why isn't Linux more popular on the desktop? Because nobody can figure out how to get rich doing it!
I have used Linux exclusively since 1999. It was tough in the beginning, but it is a no-brainer now. Anyone can install and use Ubuntu or Fedora in minutes. As for compatibility, I haven't had trouble opening a file created with MS software in years.
The reason Linux on the desktop isn't happening, is because MS controls that, with huge financial penalties for any manufacturer who install Linux on machines.
People don't necessarily care what OS they are using, as long as it is the one that comes installed on their shiny new computer. If you start shipping computers with no OS, and just a choice screen asking the user which OS to install, and giving the price of each, then you'll see Linux take off on the desktop in a hurry.
Well, not by playing the game in a straightforward fashion.
Consider Valve, for example. If Valve puts out a set-top box and uses Linux to avoid a MS license fee per system sold, the console experience may carry over rapidly to desktop linux. Now this starts as only a convenience method for delivery of Valve games only. However, Steam on windows started the same way. If Valve does the linux play for their set top box, they are likely to make the infrastructure open ended for desktop use (they don't have much to lose and I'm sure the engineers would want to enable the use case). A lot of things would likely naturally fall out of that. If there was a Steam set top box with a moderate amount of market presence, you'd have a Vevo and Netflix app come along to be steam managed under linux.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Yes, let's start with:
NVRM: os_schedule: Attempted to yield the CPU while in atomic or interrupt context
followed by a complete system hang that requires a hard power cycle.
I've been using Linux as my everyday OS for the past 4 years, but I'm going to move back to Windows if this isn't fixed soon. WTF kind of code review happens at NVIDIA?
If the ancient laptop has ME and ME is undesired and you want Windows 7, you probably aren't going to get it to work. Generally, that vintage of laptop can run a modern Linux distro, but it cannot run a modern Windows and expect to have drivers for everything (particularly a PCMCIA wireless card is likely not to have a Windows driver).
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
LMOL yeah sure. No it's not. That's why Microsoft released a software compatibility check package to see if your software will run on Windows 7.
Moron.
As you are a nicely fattened example of a Microsoft FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) Shill, I will grind your pseudo arguments into dust:
A) Marketing. So Linux is supposed to deceive and trick users into using it ? Like Microsoft employing dirty marketing (or should I call it "Propaganda" ?) tactics to make users buy their wares ? No, Linux should (and does) convince by factual superiority (security, stability, economics). It does not matter if that takes time.
B) Cost Of Ownership. You argue that this cost is lower with Windows than with Linux. Now whatabout the plethora of different Windows installers which each dump thousands of undecipherable keys into the registry and of course don't completely remove them after deinstallation ? What is the cost of these many, many windows admins who run through corporations on sneakers to fix these issues ? Large-scale Linux installations can be administed by a small team of (well-paid) experts who will write administrative scripts which will be applied in parallel to hundreds or thousands of machines. Compare that to the army of (often badly trained) Windows admins running around in a typical corporation and it is evident that Linux solutions are cheaper. Never do you have to re-install a Linux box, as all problems can be traced to human-readable, ASCII-based config files.
C) Cost of Migrations. Microsoft depends for their income stream that users will change their operating system and office package every couple of years. Never mind you were happy with Windows XP, now Redmond forces Windows 7 and Office 2010 down your throat. How much cost does the Ribbon-Idiocy alone cost corporations ? I bet it is in the range of 500 to 1000 dollars PER SEAT. Compare that to Linux, where you have the traditional, highly logical and rational Office-2003-stype OpenOffice menus. Then add the random changes Microsoft made in the Control Panel and some more locations from Windows XP to Windows 7. How much does that cost in lost end-user time ??
Transitioning from Windows XP to Ubuntu 10 or 11 Long-Term-Support Version is clearly cheaper for corporations than transitioning from Windows XP to Windows 7 !
...you cannot get things like NetFlix on Linux.
If not MS-Office, then it's Photoshop, or AutoCAD, or some game, or whatever.
On my home desktop, I don't need any of those apps, so I use Linux, and I consider it a far superior desktop experience in every way.
I'm still not able to get decent sound working on my ION based HTPC and I've tried several distros. Drivers are the issue, as usual but I also don't like the sound subsystem in Linux altogether. It never works properly out-of-the-box without any tinkering. It hardly works with hours of tinkering. Also, every device I buy that communicates with a PC (Polar FT80, fitbit, etc) all only have Windows software so I end up needing a Windows box anyway so it may has well be my primary laptop OS. The fingerprint scanner doesn't work on my laptop when using Linux. No driver. I could go on and on. Too many basic things are broken.
Don't get me started on Ubuntu. They somehow think they have to do everything differently (notice I didn't say better) Also, I get 12 different media players out of the box but NFS is not enabled by default on a new install??? I can never figure out how to do anything with Ubuntu. I always think that I know how to fix it, or configure it to my liking, but somehow it always turns out to be just enough different to be frustrating and usually requires a Google search.
Ten years ago, that would have been a valid point. Today, I find Linux much easier to use, and much easier administration.
For example, I can install Linux in about 40 minutes, windows seems to take all day. Especially since windows requires me to install apps separately, then I have to install anti-virus software, and fight with all that DRM crap.
BTW: I have many years experience in professional desktop support, and systems administration, both windows, and linux. For ease of use, and admin, I'll take Linux, over Windows, any day.
linuxhaters.blogspot.com
Most rants there are still relevant and valid. Anyway, if Linux fans want to know the real reasons they should stop asking other Linux fans.
What on Earth are you talking about? I'm talking about BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY, do you even know what that means? It's like saying that a Playstation game will play on a Playstation 2. This means that PS2 is BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE. Windows 8 is backwards compatible with Windows 7.
How do I know this? I've been developing Windows 8 apps (for Microsoft) since October of last year.
Who's the moron?
My wife is a recruiter and if people submit their resumes in anything other then .doc(x) i tell her to push back to the candidate and get a properly formatted resume.
Really? You're openly admitting to be one of those people that don't accept self contained HTML nor PDF resumes?
I just let you know that I hate you. I really don't understand why HR does that.
from 1995,1996,1997,1998,1999,2000,2001,2002,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008,2009,2010,2011
When I go a big box or electronic store, I see a dozen Windows machines. Maybe a Macbook or iMac here and there. I've never seen a Linux box on display, never mind the distro. I have Fedora at home, but stuck with XP at work. I see iPhone/iPads/Macbooks all over, so those must be popular too. I just don't see many linux distros out there, unless everyone has an environment which mimics Windows! Yes, I can tell people how cool it is, but if they don't see it at stores or at work, I'm just a lone computer geek!
These are some of the things molecules do...... given 4 billion years -Carl Sagan
I've tried to install Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Fedora, Mint et. al. on numerous systems over the years. Usually, it's on 4-5 year old desktops before I reload the original Windows OS. Just installing the crapware presents problems. Lately, with a perfectly good HP desktop that supports screen resolutions up to ridiculous numbers in Windows, Ubuntu and Mint won't go any higher than 1024 x 768 without an idiotic twenty-step CLI procedure. Who in their right mind would want to install these turds on a NEW system, especially when a 4 year old desktop presents issues? Nobody. Good for you, if you've never had issues installing and satisfactorily running your favorite distro on any system. I could care less. It's junk, and apparently the devs are more concerned with making new shit work instead of fixing the old shit that never has. Case in point, Shuttleworth. What a tool.
I cut over to Linux recently. I loved it. The only issue I had was that there wasn't an outlook alternative. For email, Thunderbird was sufficient (I wouldn't say it was better). I used Lightning for my calendaring. This was my major problem. Things would randomly disappear from my calendar causing me to miss meetings. I had to go back to windows unfortunately. The day that there is a better alternative, is the day that I put Linux back onto my work computer.
Plus their childish insistence on labeling it GNU/linux
Is there a better snappy name for "a Linux-based operating environment that isn't embedded or Android"?
Or M$
Slashdot comment subjects are limited to 50 characters. M$ saves seven while calling to mind Microsoft's roots as a publisher of BASIC interpreters. (In old-skool BASIC, what did 10 LET M$ = "Microsoft": PRINT M$ do?)
Why should it? Linux is there as an alternative to users. You choose to use it or not. It is your problem if you want to pay OS licenses or not. Open Source in general is all about choices. I personally would love if people used Linux (any of the distros) more, but if you don't want to, that's fine. We will continue to work and try to make it better for people that appreciate a damn awesome OS.
No business with its eyes open and an interest any deeper than running some kind of "office suite" is going to take linux seriously. Until linux abandons the GPL's non-free-as-in-non-freedom policies, your whole idea of "free" will continue to drag you down, and keep you down, in the muck and linux will continue to trundle on with nothing but its own inertia and the push-force of a small group of dedicated (but confused) geeks.
If you want to claim your code is free, then stop putting limitations on who can use it, and how. If you want to sell it, then sell it. But get out of this stupid never-never land of "you can enhance it if you give your own work away."
Oh, and make sure there's a bloody GUI in the darned thing. It's 2012. Long past time for that kind of API to be rolled into the actual OS. Want to add others? Fine. Leave the door open to add others. But for megafucks sake, make one standard.
And here's a free tip: There are no real-time desktop OS's. Need your thread to get attention every 200 usecs? Too bad. But there are a lot of widgets and gadgets that need real time attention, especially in the corporate and manufacturing world. So if you want to do something that has some actual appeal, cobble up a real time version of an OS that has no GPL poison, and make sure it comes with a bloody GUI. As a bonus, an OS like that would do a truly excellent job with audio and video.
But the worst thing that ever happened to the linux community was the GPL. Hands down. Believe it. Live it. And get the fuck rid of it.
I’m new to programming and not really knowledgeable to comment here generally, though I read Slashdot regularly mostly for the comments—you guys are great. I’ve had both Windows 7 and Ubuntu 11.04 in a dual boot configuration on my desktop and laptop for quite some time. I installed Ubuntu because I was told, correctly I think, that it was a good way to get to know my machine, but I pretty much never booted into Ubuntu because I never really had to and for what I was using the computer, Windows worked really well. At any rate, a couple of days ago I get a ‘this copy of Windows is not genuine’ message at the bottom left corner of my desktop—probably because it probably really isn’t—so I upgraded to 12.04 and moved over to Ubuntu. I think I’m going to stick with it. The first thing I notice is that only one of my monitors displays, so I go into ‘display’ or whatever and see that the system isn’t aware of a second monitor. Detect monitors does nothing. So I spend some time googling and somehow after surfing I discover that there’s this nvidia-setting app on my system that I can use to configure my video card/display. I spend about 40 minutes messing with the configurations, trying different settings until, yay, I get my dual monitor display up and running. It’s running okay, but it doesn’t look nearly as crisp as it did on Windows. Also the top panel of the desktop covers the top of my applications’ windows so that I need to drag them down to minimize or close them. I am now researching moving the desktop panel, which seems to be trickier than it should be on this new Ubuntu release. I did learn a bit in the process, about drivers and configurations and settings utilities, so I’m more equipped to deal with the next issue that hits me, but none of this happens (as far as I know) on Windows and after everything, so far, Widows looks better. Now I have to set up my wifi router and I don’t think it will be as easy to do as following the prompts on the Linksys setup wizard I used on the Windows cd I got when I bought the product. Good thing, I have some free time tonight. It’s thrilling to have a solved a problem, and I was too happy having figured out how to configure the dual display (baby steps ) to worry about the display quality (though I do hope there’s way to fix it). I will more become more knowledgeable hacking my way through the OS but if I weren’t interested in learning about this stuff, I’d pony up the bucks and go with Window 7 which I think is a stellar product. To answer the question, I think the only way Linux gets respectable market share is when and if users get to choose (off the shelf) between a Widows loaded machine and a substantially less expensive Linux machine. I know of no way now to buy a machine without building it (or having it built, which is was I did with my desktop and is why I have an illegal Windows OS) and save money by going Linux. So the ‘free’ advantage is mostly moot for regular users who simply buy machines. As far as I know all machines come with Windows when shipping from major retailers.
Wish you would have told me that when RedHat 3.0.3 came out, cause that's when I went to Linux. And now that I work at home, I use Linux on the desktop for work as well.
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
Surely it's not an attempt to prevent printing multiple coupons
That's exactly what it is, as far as I can tell.
since even if I couldn't find a way to capture the coupon in a PDF on Windows, I could just scan and copy the one I printed.
For one thing, not if it has anti-photocopying marks all over it. For another, a lot of softer security measures aren't intended to be foolproof. They're intended to make it so that counterfeiting requires an overt, intentional act. It's easier to prove wrongdoing when you can establish intent.
What on earth are you blabbing about? What application was having trouble converting e-mail and how would that be OpenSuSEs fault? Also why did you try and install a debug version of KDE on a production machine? That's development material, not production.
Reinstalling from scratch is a Windows click monkey solution. With Linux, if you have problems, you should fix them on the machine, because re-installs will have you end up in exactly the same spot of trouble you were before.
The way you tend to try to solve your computer problems, you are just a horror to do tech support for, regardless of what OS you are using. All operating systems suffer trouble, most of them being the users themselves and you are one prime example of that. Sure, "computers should be user friendly", but the way you are using a computer, you'll end up with one schizophrenic box indeed.
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
As for the rest of your points, you could have just used a VM.
For one thing, one would still have to buy a $200 operating system to run inside the VM. For another, I was under the impression that the Windows Media DRM associated with Silverlight streaming video would intentionally break if it detected a VM.
You need to be willing to relearn how to do things you've gotten used to and it doesn't hurt to have a friend help show you how it's done.
Provided that one knows how to find such a friend who lives within a reasonable distance of oneself.
Cost Quote
First, Windows itself isn't that expensive when you get it bundled in with new desktops and laptops.
It does not come free, It would be $120 cheaper still If it wasn't forced sale. And what's wrong selling a Linux system at the same price as a windows system. MS Office has to be paid for to acttive it, Anti Virus software has to be pay for to activate it, which pushies the price up, Then there is the other over priced proprietary software to buy.
Savings?
trumpeting the cost savings made by switching from Windows to Linux, claiming his city has saved over €4m over the last year alone. Ude claims that Munich's IT department saved about a third of their total budget last year by dumping Windows.
Gartner are so far behind the times, It's unbelieable, they don't even know what Microsoft are doing, Over the last month MS is now the 20th largest company that's contributing their Code to the Linux kernel, MS have Started their own Linux Open Source Software development department, MS paid Billions to partner with Novell, "In a turn for the books the BBC reports that Microsoft's have invested £300 million in Barnes and Nobles Nook e-reader. and the list goes on and on,
Michael Silver, an analyst with Stamford, Conn.-based Gartner group, says MS supports each version of windows for ten years. Since when?. The only windows version MS supported for 10 plus years is Xp, that's because they was forced too. and for no other reason, Windows 95 to 98, windows 98 to 2000, windows ME, and windows NT, to 2002, Vista 2002 to 2003, Xp forced to carry on supporting it
Companies wind up paying either for the time it takes to upgrade all the Linux machines, or for the extended support. "The cost ends up approaching Windows -- if not surpassing it -- fairly quickly," Silver says.
Answer:-
Linux will run on old 386 systems with 521 megabytes of ram. will windows Xp or 7? "No' Linux today does not need hardware upgrades to run it
Quote
The idea that Linux is free and companies can save a lot of money by switching is a myth, he adds,
Answer
trumpeting the cost savings made by switching from Windows to Linux, claiming his city has saved over €4m over the last year alone. Ude claims that Munich's IT department saved about a third of their total budget last year by dumping Windows.
I could go on but won't
Micro$oft,
Micro$oft,
Micro$oft,
Micro$oft.
1. Micro$oft been in the PC market since the beginning.
2. Micro$oft's O/S is cheap.
3. Majority of the drivers are for Micro$oft O/S.
4. Micro$oft makes it hard as possible to use anything else.
Let me know how well those flash videos work and the good weekend setting up a new rig when Joe Six pack just plugs his new shiny Windows box from bestbuy and it boots up and works.
I am glad I do not use Linux anymore with the shitty Unity UI and keep it around in a VM. Windows 7 is supperior as I do things desktop oriented when not working and do not have time to have the system crash because an update screwed it up with no ABI like every other OS has.
My ATI card can easily go black at any time if there is an update. Not worth the effort and is laughable if you think an average Joe should put up with that.
http://saveie6.com/
Linus needs some of that J-L Gassee super-genius insight for the desktop. Linus' random-rants are mildly interesting, but don't seem to carry a lot of weight.
The problem is that just when the desktop guys get something working pretty well, they throw it into the garbage heap, and start from scratch (KDE3->4, Gnome 2->3, etc.)
Add in the fact that many distros (Fedora cough, cough) keep on trying to turn it into a Microsoft clone by ditching the Unix model of storing configuration information in text files (systemd anyone). Even for a long term linuxphile, it reaches the point of absurdity; I lose my energy and interest to learn the latest wiz-bang technology which is often just a giant leap backwards.
Now Consider BeOS. It had a UNIFIED package kit system. You had one, nice, way to program. Things like sound and video worked beautifully. My old BeOS system could do things 10 years ago that Linux is still struggling to do.
...plane and simple.
- "Most people" won't use Linux until they are 100% sure that the programs/hardware(incl. drivers) they want are available for Linux.
- "Most people" won't use Linux until they are 100% sure that the files they exchange with others are compatible. Granted, people seen to "accept" that files from different versions of MSOffice aren't compatible.... I'm not sure why.
- Most companies won't support Linux until they are sure that their efforts will pay off.
Because of this "simple" problem, Linux will continue to have a limited appeal :(
I know somewhere that had similar issues.
So one guy got smart. He started mentioning how old our version of office was etc. The techies followed with the same mutterings.
After that circulated around, it was announced that we were going to bring in a newer version of Office (nobody said MS Office). By making it sound like an update/upgrade, rather than a newer version, acceptance was greater and everyone actually seemed to like it.
I used to use linux distributions all the time. But one thing that bugged me the most was sound issues. Since kernel 2.6.34 and above, my desktop machine never had sound (and this is a 4 year old machine). Plus other things that I hated. The best environment I ever had was Gnome 2. Gnome 3 was not my cup of tea. It has gotten so bad (even Linux Mint doesn't solve my sound issue, and it's odd that older versions run my sound card perfectly) that I run linux instead as a guest on a windows environment. Besides, most of my development tools are in windows nowadays, and frankly, I'm getting a little too old in tinkling around with my system.
This article is based on estimates from Gartner. They are both biased and ill informed. From the article:
__________
In addition, the free versions of Linux are only supported with free fixes for about a year, says Michael Silver, an analyst with Stamford, Conn.-based Gartner group. "You have to switch to the new version of Linux every year," he says. "Microsoft supports each version of Windows for ten years -- I don't have to pay any more money, and I still get security fixes. Even vendors that do offer extended security fixes for Linux, like Novell or Red Hat, they're going to charge every year for the privilege."
__________
The claims made by the analyst are simply false.
The bottom line is that the desktop form factor is in rapid decline. Tablets and phones are eating away at them. In addition, most stores do not offer Linux preinstalled. The consumer, a mindless sheep, uses whatever is placed in front of them.
The article is both a non-starter, and old news. What is the premise, other than FUD? Do they really think that Linux users will abandon their cherished operating system because they are at "2%" market share? No, the article is to put pressure on IT shops and software companies to abandon their Linux efforts.
You're such a paid shill that you literally reek! GTFO and don't let the door hit you on the ass. A pox on your house and the crappy people you represent.
Jesus, it's 2012 and we can't even get shills who can come up with new FUD? This crap hasn't even changed a micron since the year 2000.
Die in a fire, a*holes.
If not us, who? If not now, when?
I guess I will comment on this story next week when you re-run it with a different source.
I live in the Solomon Islands, and getting people to adopt Linux has one main problem. Unless the software is pre-loaded on a laptop, almost no-one pays for commercial software. The 'computer experts' in the Solomons get business by loading pirated software onto peoples' computers, thereby giving it to them 'for free' and 'saving them lots of money'. Too bad the machines flake out again in four to sixth months due to malware load and have to be reloaded by the 'the experts' again, for a fee of course, but they load the software again 'for free'. They find it impossible to see value in open source software - there must be something wrong with it if there is no cost involved. I've had a Solomons IT guy arguing against me installing a samba server as it would not make the government department appear 'professional', meanwhile he was running Windows 2000 desktop with a file share as the file server. Ubuntu should place a US$500 license fee on their products - it would be pirated like hotcakes...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
People are not buying desktop PCs anymore, they buy laptops, netbooks, tablets or use their smartphone most of the time. Linux on laptops could be big nowdays if distributions and productivity apps didn't suck that much (give an Outlook user Thundebird and they'll complain about its lack of a proper calendar despite Lightning; give an MS Office user LibreOffice and they'll find some feature that doesn't work as well or similar enough to MS Office ...). And then there's games, why isn't WINE there yet after all these years?
.
"I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
Endless compatibility issues, imperfect rendering, fonts, layout problems, etc.
Are the differences between LibreOffice Writer and Microsoft Word in thise respect substantially bigger than those between versions of Word, or even between installations of the same version of Word on machines with different default printers or different default paper sizes?
...when Desktop Linux usage approaches half of that of Microsoft's most recent failure, Vista.
The lowest estimate for Vista usage at 7.49% is 5x that of the average estimate of Linux usage at about 1.33% here.
Ken
Linux on the desktop will never work...
-- I've been using it for 13 years.
A French car? Are you sure?
-- I'm on my fourth one... they're so good my friends started to buy them. I didn't lose any friend till now...
A Chinese car? Are you crazy?
-- Well, I own one and it works fine.
Things change subtly with time. Who'd say traditional car makers would have a hard time?
DEC went belly up, Sun went South, IBM sold its PC division, HP wants to get out of the hardware business... my impression is that the trend won't stop here. In the future, we might be forced to use a Linux desktop, just like developing new things is way easier with such an unencumbered platform. Don't you agree? Well, will see...
it has nothing to do with compliance with exisitng apps like office (yes, I cd spell if i cared)
it has nothing to do with gnu/linux wars, eas of instal, or any of
NONE OF THAT STUFF MATTERS
What matters is, *why should I change * ? /., ever changed anything.
if there is no *compelling * reason, noone, in the history of hte univererse, except for 5 or s6 geeks on
you need a compelling reason to change.
visicalc was compelling
getting easy to load cheap music ipod was compelling
etc
and the funniest thing is, the linux people are so stupid, they won't patent it (assuming they ever get it) and MS will just blow them away..
Linux has three main advantages, which are likely over time to result in ever growing market share, among CONSUMERS, even with all the problems of Ubuntu's "k3lwness" and Unity and so on.
First: It can extend the life of older hardware. This is a non-trivial part of Linux's appeal, the power of Linux lies in an install of a low-resource distribution like Feather or Puppy, that takes a PC/Laptop that is "useless" and recycles it to a family member. Nothing is getting cheaper, heck food prices and gas prices are rising due to supply constraints and increased Asian/Chinese demand. This is not the go-go 1990's, but "the new normal" where shaving off costs for everything is standard consumer behavior. Linux does very well to stretch budgets, and a second/third laptop desktop that "mostly works" for Junior or web-surfing is better than shelling out $400+ for a new system. Even with glitches in sound, screen resolution, etc.
Second, Linux is far less vulnerable to viruses and hack-attacks, partly by inheriting the UNIX security design, and partly because of its obscurity. As the cost of data theft, compromising online banking and so on rise, people are more likely to migrate to Linux away from Windows (miserable security model). Criminal organizations LOVE online attacks, its low-risk and high-reward. That stuff is not going to go away any more than consumers will avoid going online (because all sorts of things require being online, like say banking, or streaming, etc.)
Here the biggest barriers are Adobe dropping future Flash support, no native Netflix application, since those are things people mostly do online.
Third, is the cost of software. Yeah, a lot of free software is pretty rough. Faced with shelling out $$$ to fix photos or using the Gimp for free, or buying a sound editor vs. Audacity for free (ripping old vinyl records to MP3s), or buying Quickbooks versus using GNUCash for free, what will cash strapped consumers do? Basically trade time for money. Consumers would NOT do that if they had lots of bucks, but considering how the "new normal" is saving as much as you can in cash, I expect a growing number of consumers to make that trade-off.
And that is the biggest Linux advantage. There a zillion apps out there. All free. Are they the greatest? Nope. Even the cream of the crop, Abiword and LibreOffice, have bugs and problems. But they are free. And when EVERYTHING is just going up and up in price, free beats not-free for most people most of the time.
Yes Linux has problems. But it also has critical advantages, in cost-savings. For consumers, that's not nothing. Its a lot of something.
The last bastion of independent analysis, the seeker of truth and the purveyor of equanimity.
Oh wait, I'm thinking of someone else.
Really, if you do everything which Gartner advises you not to, you won't go far wrong.
Burns: We're building a casino!
McAllister: Arrr. Give me 5 minutes.
I work in a Software Engineering department for a major company (>3k staff), with over 150 Linux desktop users, and a team of only 3 linux desktop admins.
These guys have things down to a science here, and are far less authoritarian than the Windows Desktop IT team, who won't even let us change our screen saver settings without forcing us to open a ticket, which all stems from security issues and lame IT policies.
Everyone here is an educated and skilled engineer, and is expected to know how to *at least* perform normal day-to-day operations using a linux desktop. The defacto here is Fedora Linux, for many obvious reasons.
All of our engineers have the freedom of sudo to install/configure their system accordingly, within the realm of support. If they decide that they are better-off administrating their machine on their own, then they have free reign to change the root password, and the linux desktop staff no longer has to support their needs. They are then on their own and considered skilled enough to support themselves.
Our Windows Desktop infrastructure is an entirely different story. There is an entire team of ITSEC engineers who are constantly watching the network traffic, and often remotely snooping on users desktops.
Linux is here for those who are educated, skilled, or curious enough to figure it out and use it to their heart's content. Linux is not here to replace Windows or Mac as a desktop, unless you yourself (as I) have chosen to do so.
It's ironic that MS pays Gartner and PC World and all these other 'sponsored' media outlets to spread PR/FUD against Linux-based systems. They'd be better off fixing the bugs in Windows, with those funds, rather than misleading the short-sighted Managerial types who continue to make bias decisions and ruin companies thanks to these lame efforts to secure a market share.
the only permanence in existence, is the impermanence of existence.
So Slashdot had their Annual Linux Desktop Flamefest where everyone argues about why Linux has not take over the desktop as planned. One issue that isn't brought up enough is update risk.
I recently came across this issue with a home server build that will mainly be used as a file server. Sure I could use Linux but can I trust it to not break any drivers with a system update? No, especially since it will use a wireless connection. I suppose I could freeze the build but that limits any additions. I also wouldn't be able to expose it to the internet.
Then there is Samba. Will it probably work with few issues? Yes. Can I trust it to never give me headaches in the future? God no. What if I later want to update it? Oh great, update risk x2. It's just easier to install Windows and forget about it. Linux cannot be trusted when it comes to updates and I'm sick of everyone pretending otherwise. Why roll the dice to see if you get a break? What do you win if you don't hit 00?
Linux has trouble attracting technical users for practical reasons and Slashdotters are still in denial of this. Most of them still want to believe in the enlightenment theory whereby if only users were exposed to Linux via friends or marketing then they would be sold on Linux.
I've managed Linux servers and you can't sell me on Linux. WTF does that tell you?
The other big delusion is the issue of stability. Linux used to be sold on stability but Slashdotia is in complete denial of how stable Windows has become. Not only is Windows stable as a server OS but the company behind it doesn't actually what to break your drivers every 6 months. Linux distros don't seem to give a shit about what their changes do and that makes me leery of using Linux in anything that isn't locked down or managed by a third-party so someone else can play the dick-around game if something goes wrong.
But I do find these flamefests entertaining as I am fascinated by how deluded and stuck in 1999 Linux fans are. I can't imagine explaining to a casual user today how they have to go into the command line to fix a broken update. I had to explain how to use Amazon's cloud service the other day to someone who was pissed that Amazon and his Mac didn't simply talk to each other and figure out which music goes where. I think I would rather lick road tar then explain how Linux doesn't have itunes and how some codecs are "non-free" and why his wireless no longer works and ................ yea right. Selling Linux on the desktop to the typical user today is a joke. Just buy your Grandma an Android tablet and come back to reality. Oh and fix the fucking update problem already.
Switching directly to GNU/Linux seems to cause too many compatibility problems. I spent a year dealing with mostly free software on my Windows computer. Switching to GNU/Linux was a breeze.
Half the time I think people hate GNU/Linux so much because it's so different to what they're used to.
I still have Windows in a Virtual Machine in case I need to get Windows compatible, although I don't use it that often. (I also have my old Win partition dual-booted, but I don't use it)
Modded you up.
My parents have been using Ubuntu for about 2-3 years. We used to reinstall Windows XP about once a year because something or other would break. They haven't had a problem with Ubuntu. If a competent user does the initial setup, there is absolutely nothing difficult about using any of the ease-of-use-centric distros.
FWIW, it is easier to install Ubuntu, Fedora, Mint or Suse than Windows 7. Definitely.
Linux on the desktop hasn't taken off, because there is no money in it.
money builds a platform, and the linux desktop has too many challenges, for it to be a profit: document compatability, windows users reinstalling os's.
but it's okay, because the linux desktop is the future. eventually android/chromeos/linux desktop will look like one, and with the money google brings, it will happen
Of course, since the first thing I do when I want operating system advice is to ring Gartner... come on people, you know how companies like Gartner make money.
Just think smiling people in white lab coats telling you that your breath will be 93.7% fresher if you use this toothpaste.
This is the Monolithic Linux fallacy. Linux is a set of operating systems which all include the Linux kernel (one component - the central one - of a huge collection of software). Ubuntu is a commercially-oriented (and also non-commercially-oriented) distribution. Redhat is another. There are several more.
It makes no sense that any of these, or any hobbyist distro, should simply stop what they're doing, out of a misguided sense that "there shouldn't be so many different Linux distros".
What does make sense is for the various Linux distros to agree on standards, where that makes sense (i.e. in "mature" areas).
We're at a point where 90% of the Linux versions of Apps do 90% of the functions (and sometimes way more) than their Windows/Mac counterparts. The issue now is that the PEOPLE are retarded A-Holes that would rather call the computer stupid than realise it's them who don't know how to perform a function on a particular program.
And ALL IT TAKES IS ONE STUPID ARROGANT A-HOLE to infect a whole team of people by insisting on needing to have MS Office installed, and then no-one can properly render that persons files (often times even other versions of Office/Windows) and it doesn't look right. SOLUTION: Fire all the A-Holes.
I have a bunch (15 or so) of Ubuntu Linux Machines that happily just work, for years on end with NO problems, several that were purchased for around $100 used on craigslist. If someone doesn't know how to use OpenOffice or GImp (etc...), they learn, if they are not capable of learning, then they are obviously arrogant A-Holes and unable to perform their job so we fire them.
For us, Linux works great!
Who's well-known in the security community who feels as I do about trolls like yourself that harass others over security information they post as I did earlier...
I'll let him speak for me on my thoughts about yourself then (because we've discussed this happening to he also):
---
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Burn
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 9:25 PM
To: 'Alexander Kowalski'
Subject: RE: Mr. Burn: On Mr. Hobbitt, clearing my app, & hosts files
lawsuits + being harassed over using them... apk
Alexander,
I don't actually get time for many sites such as slashdot anymore, but certainly see my fair share of trolls on the MyWot (Web of Trust (I'm a moderator there, and MyWot includes hpHosts in their "ratings")) and Malwarebytes forums, and you're correct - it's always either users of malicious software/sites, or the owners of such, that are doing it.
Regards
Steven Burn
I.T. Mate
www.it-mate.co.uk
---
In regards to suspecting YOU, Mr. Anonymous Coward TROLL, of being in fact, a malware maker who does NOT want others reading guides on security that actually work...
----
"Also, be careful, you called me a malware-maker, that's libel you know, I can sue you for that" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, @03:20PM (#39848863)
OH, really? I didn't know someone named "anonymous coward" could be libeled... lol!
Get back to me when attorney is willing to represent anonymous coward in a libel suit... ok??
(Until then? You make me laugh...)
APK
P.S.=> Better luck next time troll.... U FAIL, off-topic as per your usual, always... & YOU KNOW I JUST HAVE TO ADD THIS:
This? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'"...
... apkb
Your message contains very insightful observations of desktop computing. Hats off to you.
I miss the days when I had absolutely idiot jobs that required about 1/10 of my brain 1/10 of the time, and I could do things like check out old hardware, install Linux and screw around until my fingers fell off. I have blown up many an operating system, and fixed many of them in turn.
Right now, I'm just a VM junkie. While Windows has improved quite a bit (I never knew it had a built in sort command until today) it's sometimes great to have a virtual Linux or BSD box for experimentation and development.
Then again, I've got another emulator also. I keep KEGS running in the background in case I need a quick game of Arkanoid or Centipede.
Futurist Traditionalism
I personally coudn't care less if you or anyone else decides that they don't want to run GNU/Linux. I don't give a damn if it doesn't have a big "market share" on the desktop. You and I obviously have different definitions of what a good, successful operating system is. Linux has been my main operating system at home since the late 1990's, has always exceeded my needs, and works quite well thank you very much.
I laugh at the poor souls running Windows who can't seem do the simplest things with their computers (e.g. this morning I needed to find a file I know that I edited last Saturday that had "account" in the name, which I found in a few seconds). I laugh at the Apple fanboys that pay twice as much for their gear, and always seem to NEED the latest stuff. Folks these days can't seem to distinguish what they want from what they need, or that a putting forth some effort to understand your tools will have rewards later on.
It was the dark ages of computing when I got started. I remember downloading Slackware onto a bunch of floppy disks at the university computer lab, then bringing those home to do my installation. I didn't know ANYONE using Linux back then. When I couldn't figure something out, I'd go back to the lab the next day to search USENET for answers. The process was very slow. It took me almost a month to figure out how to get my modem to connect to the campus network, but once I did things got a lot easier. At the time I remember thinking how hard all of this was, but I couldn't afford new hardware (or Windows 95) at the time. If I wanted something better than Windows 3.11 it was up to me to make it happen.
I feel like we've lost sight of the value of struggling, failing, and trying again. Tackling tough problems helps us become a better people. My investment in really learning the ins and outs of Linux was well worth it. It gave me a much better understanding of technology, and honed my ability to analyze and troubleshoot. I'm a better Geek because of it. In this day and age, when Geeks rule, that's a very good thing.
Now, get off my lawn.
Old guy.
Once trojans are inside, they become REMOTELY EXPLOITABLE, fool!
Plus, everyone knows Android's being hit left and right for years now. Why?? It's most used on smartphones. Same as why Windows gets "hit"...
I.E.-> When you're #1, you get exploited, because malware makers are just like pickpockets: They go after where the MOST users are, especially non-security aware ones, hence, most used = most attacked (just like pickpockets go to crowded malls, city streets, bus & train stations - to find "easy meat" to exploit).
Like or not also? Android IS A LINUX VARIANT, period...
APK
P.S.=> So much for your b.s. & attempting to use "remote exploits", because once a trojan's in?? It can do what it pleases, to remote control sources malware makers use (hence, botnets etc./et al)... apk
I got slammed with this today at work. I finally got my nice experimental Linux box going this weekend after procrastinating for a year, and when I mentioned to one of my snarky younger colleagues "It's a free operating system", he said, complete with grammar as is, "So it's like a Microsoft (sic) but a lot worse?"
But get this - I see all news these days through the eyes of a former Magic the Gathering player perspective - no one story means anything. Combos of stories - NOW we're cooking! It's like they deliberately release separate components of a dangerous combo separately to soothe the masses from staging revolts.
Media: Songs/Movies/maybe Books: "I don't want to pay a red cent! Gimme free even if I technically break the law!"
Operating Systems: "Free, at the cost of doing a little work? Eew! Please make me pay $500!"
That just reeks/screams Combo. "1000 songs and 100 movies free if you use the free Operating system Linux!"
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
"Get psychological help dude!" - by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 30, @04:45PM (#39850059)
1.) A license to practice psychiatry, Dr. Quack (the "SiDeWaLk-ShRiNk" of /.)
2.) A PhD in the psychiatric sciences
3.) A formal examination of myself in a professional psychiatric environs to determine my "alleged mental state" according to your "insta-snap 'diagnosis'/'prognosis'", Dr. Quack
* When you get those items to your name/credit?
Then, you can speak & YOU won't be libeling myself, off topic in an illogical ad hominem attack (as you are "wont to do" when you have nothing else, of course - you're "ALL OUT OF ACES" in this game of poker, & you clearly do not possess the intelligence to get the best of me...).
APK
P.S.=> You make me laugh... you truly do, & this? Well... you KNOW I've just GOT to say this, as is per my usual inimitable style:
This? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'"...
... apk
I have put together dozens of linux boxes. I have no idea what you are going on about.
I don't know about video production, I don't do that. But for watching youtube, listening to mp3s, watching movies, linux does just fine.
For the desktop there's windows prime, or windows professional, or windows starter.
For there servers, there are probably a dozen versions, enterprise edition, database, and so on.
Unlike Linux, what runs on one version on windows will often not run another.
There are only about a dozen major versions of Linux.
Yes why indeed.
To date, Apple, has been secussful with two UNIX variants: Mac OS X and iOS.
Google, of all things, has been successful with Android (Linux) on mobile devices.
Where foreoutthough Berkley Systems Develompent, Red Hat and SuSE. No need ... for Windows 8 'Prometheus' .. just avoid
to mention Microsoft who is still stuck in 1982 thinking or there abouts. What was the
most popular smart phone in 1982 and was it running an operating system from
Microsoft? That's why you should not waite
and do not worry.
LoL
The cost? The fricken cost? WTF are they smoking? Linux only costs on the desktop for business if you follow the windows paradigm. Throw it out the window. Linux is perfect for business on the desktop. Get rid of all employee computers, replace with 3d accelerated thin clients (or re-use the desktop machines as the thin clients). Centralize applications, centralize document management.
This is the IT dream: Users cant install applications, they must focus on their work. Software only gets installed in one location. The actual hardware lasts a long time, and there are no licenses to track. All documents and emails are centrally stored, and with a modified workflow they all are tagged with metadata with the users name, edit history and date.
This is a no brainer, but IT in most places are a bunch of microsoft drones that cant get oout of the rut that Microsoft has trained them to stay in. Be inventive, use the current tools, think thin and simple.
I have been using Ubuntu for years. But my next system will run something else, probably Mint.
1. Unity is an ugly piece of crap that makes it hard to find the applications you want to run.
2. Gnome 3 is a big step backwards, removing useful features that people have come to rely on.
Screwups like these don't encourage people to use Linux.
Doubt it? Check out this thread: http://linuxmusicians.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7928
I have absolutely zero idea what you are trying to say here.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
... or just simply wrong documentation ..... ever try using Boost??
Boost is an amazing array of useful libraries .... with a huge problem. The documentation SUCKS!!! The document library is HUGE ... but mostly useless. The great majority of the examples are wrong (ie: don't compile as written) and are simplify to the point of uselessness (ie: worst than the elevator examples for OOP). The format of the API documentation is confusing, with definitions all over the place instead of a single location. In many cases, the document doesn't even match the API signature ... and because almost NONE of the source contain any kind of comments, it is just a guess game with a trial & error work just to see if you can use the feature.
Then you go on the web and find almost nothing. Just try looking for examples and info about boost::any
Even the best OSS editor is not even 1% as usable as the crappiest software package you can get for Windows (Macs are a hell of a lot better ... so they don't count).
Sure, you can (eventually) get the job done ... but it always takes a lot of time with a combination manual scripts, to run multiple programs ..... to do the same job that can be done with one click everywhere else.
"Hobbyists might value their time less, but employee hour for a company costs A LOT"
;)
Both you and crazyjj, astroturfing like mad
Yeah- I want two cable channels, two soft drinks, two political parties and two computers... any more and I get confused... too many choices... too much freedom- we need to be controlled. If I would have been around then, I would have joined with Israel and demanded a King too... (See 1 Sam 8)
Come on people- WindBlows and Mac are not the only flavors of ice cream- or are you stuck with chocolate and vanilla too?
The reason there are so many linux distributions is because it is a highly individualized operating system, which is the way to be in the future. Linux is flourishing too, in ways you are not even admitting- it is on more devices than other OSes... It provides a development platform of near zero cost for the average new developer. Just download it and use it. It works. As ubuntu has proven- linux is now for -- gasp--- even the former windows user!
The first thing I do when I get a laptop is blow away Windows with an install of my preferred distro. Plus, I keep my distro and data separate on the hard drive partitions... so if I want a change, it's no big deal. By the way, if you still use the Windows Crutch- creating an extra swap partition for linux, and one for windows, as well as about 20gb for a linux distro like Debian Squeeze (my current) with plenty of room to grow, and having a Data partition for all your data will allow you to boot to either - especially when WindBlows crashes like a motherf**ker as it will inevitably do. Hard drives are so large these days...
There are vast communities of users who won't just flash you rtfm when you have a linux question.
So as Ron Paul is showing with the thousands and thousands coming to see him, the establishment and its propaganda are being beaten. People really don't like viruses and having to completely reformat their entire windows disks to solve their problems. People do not like shelling out $400+ or $800+ or even more just because a trojan took over... it is not worth it.
I have been a linux user since 1999 and I can attest that it has gotten much easier to use for the average user since my early days on just the command line. And don't let anyone fool you - Windows still has a command line!
Wake up and appreciate the diversity of distributions for different purposes. Maybe you do not want to deal with poor firmware in a stock router- a cheap old PC and ipcop gives you all the routing and more that you need for your network. And it is yours to manage.
Debian Squeeze is nice- I switched from Ubuntu because I did not like the latest changes in Ubuntu- and I am running a second partition of Fedora just because I feel like it. I will admit Grub2 is something of a bother right now for me- but not for the average person- it works fine.
The people who say linux is confusing are the same that said mac was confusing. It's not. It's just different. Different is good. Spend some time with something different... If you already run libreoffice on windows as well as Firefox... what the hell are you waiting for?
Try printing an A3 pdf in landscape
Okay...
>>>goes away and prints an A3 pdf in landscape from Ubuntu.
Did you forget to turn the printer on or something?
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
You mean the operating system with multiple millions of dollars of advertising and marketing behind it has a greater mindshare among the general public than the one put together by volunteers with no such backing? Colour me shocked.
Actually, it shows an amazing shift in the computer-buying public, especially in America. Finally, people are beginning to realize the difference between price and value. And that's why Macs (and Apple in general) are selling like the proverbial hotcakes.
It was fine (and even a little fun) in the late 70s and early 80s to tinker around with your computer, share the latest tips and tricks at your local computer club. It was a voyage of discovery, and pretty much everyone was in the same boat.
But thirty years later, the vast majority of people want their computer to work like their microwave oven, and they are, in increasing numbers, willing to spend what amounts to pretty much zero dollars difference over the life of the product, to achieve that level of "just works".
Linux has had at least a third more time than OS X has to get its shit together; but it not only can't, as shown by the statement:
"But to suggest like the top poster here that Linux "consolidate" its distributions into one shows a serious misunderstanding of what Linux is and how it's put together.)"
the Linux community (whatever that is(!!!), actually doesn't want to get its shit together!
So there it is in a nutshell: Linux is doomed, and proud of it!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Flash videos run fine at 720p (my screen is only 768) on my laptop, and it's a low-powered (for battery life reasons) thinkpad with integrated graphics. As for the "good weekend". When my sister got her netbook (netbooks have long been known as the least compatible machines), it *litterally* took less time to fully install ubuntu, WITH full home-folder encryption, than it did to drive to the store and buy it. After 2 years of using it, the only problem she's had with it (barring physical damage she caused by dropping it) was some recent hdd corruption no doubt caused by inadvertant hard-shutdowns due to the battery being worn out and that only took me a half hour to fix. As for video cards going black from an update, I haven't seen any reports of that since the 9.10 days, and I spend a LOT of time in the #ubuntu channel helping people out.
Slightly off-topic, but guess what the #1 most common support issue has been in the #ubuntu irc channel for the last 2 weeks? Minecraft shitting the bed because Oracle is fucking with Java.
A management team feels confident if they have someone to blame when anything breaks down.
I got slammed with this today at work. I finally got my nice experimental Linux box going this weekend after procrastinating for a year, and when I mentioned to one of my snarky younger colleagues "It's a free operating system", he said, complete with grammar as is, "So it's like a Microsoft (sic) but a lot worse?"
But get this - I see all news these days through the eyes of a former Magic the Gathering player perspective - no one story means anything. Combos of stories - NOW we're cooking! It's like they deliberately release separate components of a dangerous combo separately to soothe the masses from staging revolts.
Media: Songs/Movies/maybe Books: "I don't want to pay a red cent! Gimme free even if I technically break the law!"
Operating Systems: "Free, at the cost of doing a little work? Eew! Please make me pay $500!"
That just reeks/screams Combo. "1000 songs and 100 movies free if you use the free Operating system Linux!"
Don't do drugs kids.
So an army of half-qualified Windows admins running from one PC to the next is cheaper than one well-educated and experienced guy administering 10000 Linux machines remotely ?
Women should stay clear of computers. All the problems you claim are non-existent on my PCs, which were all no-names bought from a local dealer chain. Who are not complete morons like Dell, though.
I have downloaded and run Ubuntu 8 and 10 (both LTS) several times and installed it on several different machines. It always worked with less problems than Windows+Applications. No viruses, none of the alleged recompilations of anything necessary. Everything worked "out of the box" !
Most probably your post is just part of the old MS defamation tactic.
I used Ubuntu 8 LTS and now use Ubuntu 10 LTS. I will not touch Unity because I don't need to. I can stick with my LTS and switch to Mint Linux when the LTS period ends. With MS I am forced from XP to Windows 7, I am forced to use the crap Ribbon GUI, because the tyrants of Redmond decreed so.
I contract to a major national bank with over 12000 desktops in branches that I helped convert to linux several years ago (the desktops, the central environment was already predominantly linux). The direct cost savings have been substantial (especially since moving them of a Novell SLED-derived distro that carries a licensing cost to Ubuntu). More telling though is that the support costs are silly now - a second level helpdesk of about 6 people, who field 1 call each on average per day. 3 third level support technicians, who handle about 1 call a day on average. The future revisions of the branch IT infrastructure are now designed and implemented by the 3rd level support technicians, since they don't really have much actual support to do.
Everyone uses OpenOffice (will be moved to LibreOffice when the 12.04 update is shipped). I can't recall a single user issue with it that made it as far as me, and the support staff (1st and 2nd level) are really not able to do any troubleshooting.
Linux is absolutely ready for desktop use in enterprise, and has been for several years, as proved by our doing it, easily.
As the COO of a company and avid Ubuntu user I find that this is the ONE issue that keeps our firm from going 100% Ubuntu on the desktop (we are already 100% Ubuntu on the server side). Support, management, desktop share, hardware compatibility...its can all be handled in one way or another. However, LibreOffice's lack of interoperability with MS Office and the weak capability inside are a total show stopper. I am not going to have a Windows VM on every Linux desktop, just to run MS Office and Google Apps is just weak sauce. Lets face it, MS Office (Word, Excel, Powerpoint) is a great set of applications and people are used to that level of quality and feature richness. If I could change one thing about the Linux community it would be to configure it to make LibreOffice a HUGE priority going forward....almost on the same scale as the kernel itself.
All issues you keep whining about are APPLICATION PROBLEMS, Linux as an OS (meaning the really low level stuff) kicks windows ass by far, and that's why it rules on the server space.
The relevant question now is "Why linux apps (that includes audio mixers, UIs) aren't 'apache httpd' solid?"
Some may argue that the Free (as in freedom) Software Paradigm makes it a non starter for software companies to develop for that platform, and while that doesn't happen, we will keep getting "hacker quality" apps
And there is also the mentality of "Screw cross application compatibility, we'll make our own standards so quirky that no one except us will be able to use it, and we'll use our dominant position to force it as the de facto standard" (Cofff.... Office... Cofff.... IE)
I think it's a chicken-egg problem:
Linux doesn't take off on the desktop, because it doesn't have a marketshare enough so that OEMs *really* support linux, and apps get ported.
And OEM don't support linux, and apps don't get ported, because Linux hasn't taken off yet.
It may be wishful thinking, but i think, having seen the progress that the linux Desktop has gone in the last five years, (and that the desktop scene is getting more and more dominated by the browser) that it will keep slowly attracting people until it hits a tipping point where OEMs and big software players will have to support it, or start loosing money.
My wife owns a laptop supplied to her by her boss. It had W7 on it. After a couple of weeks it caught fire from the dual graphics card switch electronics overheating (Touchsmart TM2). It got returned to HP, refurbished and re-installed -with the wrong drivers, so no more touchscreen. So far everything was as was to be expected. She complains about the touchscreen not working anymore, so HP sends her the official system and rescue disks.
Three full days of cursing later there is still no W7, and everything that was on the HDD would have been gone if it hadn't been for my PuppyLinux live CD.
After these three days of cursing she told me to get that crap off her machine and install linux, like on her private Dell. All the tweaking needed was the installation of the broadcom wireless driver.
For anyone wanting to know why anyone would want a laptop with a touchscreen: she handwrites notes at meetings, that get digitized automagically. Saves paper and copying yourself, all you need is one read to see if all is correct.
I love Linux, and the only thing stopping me from using it full time on my desktop is because it's not compatible with many of my favorite games. But if I ask anyone who isn't the least bit good with computers, they say it looks way too challenging and wont even give it a chance. Even the "but it's free!" argument wont work. I think it's just us geeks who enjoy it for now.
There's "linux" - as in "Linux Is Not UniX". It's good enough for "plain ole linux"
My aim here is to defuse snarky replies from pedants. Linux by itself is a kernel, as a pedant will likely point out. Some might think the embedded uses of the Linux-the-kernel, such as those that use Newlib or uClibc instead of glibc, are in a way "plainer" than the commonly used desktop stack. Perhaps X11/Linux might be a better anti-pedant term for those desktop Linux flavors that aren't Android.
BASIC? Aggh - my eyes!!!!!
Which is part of the point of saying "M$": to make Microsoft hurt your eyes the same way old-skool BASIC did. I agree with you that "Micro$oft" is pointless, but M$ still has value in comment subjects.
The fucking topic is why Linux hasn't taken off on the desktop, some damned MS shill tells a bunch of damned lies about Linux, and setting the record straight is offtopic?
Please bring back the old style metamods!! Whoever modded the previous comment "oftopic" should NEVER EVER get mod points.
Now, THIS comment IS offtopic.
Free Martian Whores!
UNTIL they decided to completely over-indulge their own sense of relevance by forcing the mandatory Unity interface
sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop [and then] Tell me how "mandatory" Unity is.
You just proved my point.
What point did I just prove? You called Unity "mandatory", claiming that Canonical was "forcing" it on Ubuntu users, and I explained how to turn off Unity by installing a single metapackage. Please help me understand how that doesn't make Unity not "mandatory" or "forc[ed]". If you were referring only to the default install from the ISO, should I have said "install Xubuntu instead of Ubuntu" instead? Or perhaps your point was that Ubuntu lacks a discoverable GUI for installing other desktop environments; they're hidden as "technical items" in Ubuntu Software Center. If so, I'll grant that.
Just buy a $20 router and tell them to configure THAT for the internet connection.
It's not just the PC that has to be configured; the modem also has to be associated with the Internet access subscription. "Sure. Just connect your PC running Windows or Mac OS X to the router, and then run our proprietary software to configure the modem for our service through the router."
Is someone being paid by microshaft or crapple to post these stories? I swear this is the second or third one in a few weeks. Anyways, everyone should use gentoo, just like me.
Take Mint Linux.
For a brief while, there, Ubuntu proffered a best-of-breed Linux desktop experience. Indeed, Unity is quite pleasant to use on a suitable device like a notebook or something. However, 'Nix-heads hate it because of the dearth of UI tweak options, the rest of us hate it because it's ceased to be a Desktop desktop.
In my experience, this is typical of the development of Linux desktops. They hook you and then turn a corner that makes you spit them right back out again.
Microsoft does the same thing - some folks run Windows 7 with Windows 2000 look and feel; others never made it past Win 98, but you don't quite get that "shafted-under-the-hood" feeling when Windows upgrades that you get when a new release of your distro comes out.
-- A change is as good as a reboot.
So, why hasn't Linux on the desktop taken off?
Yet Another Linux Desktop Takes Over The World Analysis Thread.
Because the Lords of Kobol know the world has a recurrent need to frequently resucitate a no-longer-original nor informative, late-1990's/early 2000's already putrified dead horse just to beat the living shit out of it. Yay!
Seriously, this horse has been beaten down to its elementary particles for the last 10-12 years. And we just recently had a thread just like that. This is like, wow, dejavu of the uninformative kind.
Or, I suppose I should say, cause there are dozens of window managers and what-have-you to choose from... which are all garbage in different ways. Linux is a -fantastically- excellent server OS, because if you want a server OS, you may or may not be running it in headed mode (I do - I run a server application on mine that wants a GUI), but you're still probably not interacting with the GUI aspect of it on a regular basis. And Linux itself is great.
But as soon as you start talking about the (user mode, not actually part of Linux itself) GUI aspects of a proper, modern, WIMP-based OS, you've got loads of choices... but they all suck major balls. So no thanks.
Apple seems to have the same attitude as MS.
IT has to add staff to support Macs, Tablets, SmartPhones because their users demand this. Why would IT add to the their support costs? Just to save some other department a possible purchase price advantage? Are non-IT demanding Linux? As for viruses. The bad guys go after popular platforms in the hands of naive users.
And this man's message is incompatible with the nice marketing slides from Redmond you have been looking at the other day. I suspect he is either A) Unpatriotic (Real Americans run Windows), B) A communist or C) With AlQaeda.
I' ll report this commie-Linuxer to Fox News for you !
..phone into Redhat or Canonical Headquarters and let them analyze your Status Quo and make a transition plan ? If you give them 50% of the money you spend for licenses and the Windows-Linux support differential (the money wasted because of using Windows), these corporations can come up with tailored solutions.
For example, the Alfresco Content Management System basically is a "Composition" of many existing Open Source technologies such as Document Indexing, Fulltext search engine, relational database and some stuff they developed in-house (the CIFS support). So what Alfresco did was to save lots of money by using pre-existing components to assemble a powerful and compelling solution. The same could be done for your corporation and for your specific requirements.
I assume your managers would simply give that approach zero consideration, because that is the way the typical "old" western corporation thinks. Never mind Google, Apple and Facebook built their empires by assembling and exploiting the economics of Open Source.
I loved using Ubuntu until UNity got rammed down my throat. I went from advocate to "try something else". If I wanted someone making arbitrary decisions about how my interface should look I'd buy a Mac or Windows system. Fortunately UNbuntu pissed off more than me and people with more programing skills. Along comes Cinnamon and I am back to where I wanted.
Aside from that is the applications. Games don't work (Windows only for the most part although more are supporting OSx). Tax software, VPN clients (my company chooses I don't), etc etc.
I am happy having my main computer at home run CinnaBuntu because it does what I need. I am a very small minority of computer users. Apps define the experience (Just ask RIM how that is working out for them compared to iPad).Even Microsoft is starting to hurt as their ace in the hole Windows operating system is less relevant in the face of the Mac/iPad app surge.
You sound like a Citizen of Communist Germany, who is confused by ten different types of washing powder. Indeed, Tyranny is easier to understand than Freedom. So you prefer to Suffer The Redmond Tyranny ? If yes, my condolences.
Remember the "mutated Penguins" FUD-marketing message of Microsoft ? That's where this drivel comes from. I assume Microsoft is irritated by the fact that there is no "single entity to throw mud at". They know how to smear Oracle or Google, but what do you do against an enemy which is constantly mutating into newer and better forms ?
For the end-user, though, using Ubuntu or Mint (which is the legitimate successor of Ubuntu 11) is going to be an excellent experience of a rock-solid, well-thought out GUI. No Ribbons crap, for example. But even switching to Fedora or CentOS won't be difficult, as they also use GNOME and the same Office and Internet apps.
So mainly propaganda of the MS camp. They have a lot to lose when people realise that there are much better systems around (mainly Unix-based). They have a lot to lose when people realise that GUIs are NOT the best approach for every problem. They have a lot to lose when people realise there is no general need for virus scanners.
So they lob shit.
Linux Diversity is a Huge Strength. For example, Mr Shuttleworth of Ubuntu is hell-bent on fucking up the Gnome Desktop. So what we do ? We fork Ubuntu and call it Mint.
When Microsoft fucks up XP and calls it Vista, when they fuck up Office with the Ribbon - you must suffer it as a Windows/Office user.
When Ronald Reagan fucks up your country, you vote for someone else in the next elections. When Mr Breznew fucks up the soviet union, all you can do is to hope for the best. Do you know that concept, "FREEDOM" ??
See subject-line above: You don't do that. This is a BIG difference between how we both post.
* So, please: Grow a brain, & get a life!
(Quit stalking me also, like the obviously troubled individual you prove yourself to be here nearly constantly in doing so to myself in many of my postings here)...
APK
P.S.=> You're also ridiculously EASY to outwit and with the obvious (facts) - one redeeming point you DO HAVE though, is that you continually make me look good, I'll give you that, lol... apk
See subject-line. Now, what have YOU ever done in the Computer Sciences Arena of note then? I've done a few things of note - let's compare, big talker... lol!
(This is ALWAYS fun... because I've NEVER seen any programs for instance written by "Anonymous Coward" as you post with NO CLUE as to WHO YOU ARE @ all).
Secondly - Too bad others realize what "your kind" is about, per the quote I noted from Mr. Steven Burn of malwarebytes/hpHosts, eh?
(Funny how it "shut down your bullshit" pretty fast - along with your PUNY ATTEMPT to say I was "libeling you", but I have yet to see an AC such as yourself ever be libeled... lol, because NOBODY backs you up @ all... but, they do me!)
Now, you said I had to PROVE who I am? Ok, I want you to PROVE who CmdrTaco is. Just because he has that userID doesn't mean he is actually anyone either. You're such a fool it makes me laugh, it truly does.
APK
P.S.=> So, anyhow/anyways - As far as my being a "nobody", well... live up to the challenge I put up above, & let's see "anonymous coward" (you) and your good-to-great accomplishments in the computing arena... apk
ok then here are my initials: YPAC, so now I'm not anonymous any more, am I ?
so, please: grow a brain fucktard: anyone can post on slashdot with weird writing style and sign "APK", this doesn't identify yourself. A TRUE security expert would know that much (you know website identification, TLS, PGP, and all these complex identification thing ... there is a reason why they don't sign with their initials, à la "Hey this is MS website, trust us, it really is us !")
Also, where is your PhD in the psychiatric sciences ? because you just made a psychiatric-related statement about us and I doubt you can since you obviously don't have such a PhD (yes, you self-kicked your ass again on this one. Definitely too dumb to play with us
Oops, I almost forgot to sign to identify myself with 100% certainty: APK ... uh ? oh, no that's my other personality signing, let's try again: YPAC
From http://linuxfonts.narod.ru/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html:
- Software issues: No games (Humble Indie Bundles (vs thousands of games released for Windows and consoles every year) doesn't really count), no familiar Windows software, no Microsoft Office (LibreOffice still has major troubles opening correctly Microsoft Office produced documents), no native CIFS (simple (password protected) file sharing) equivalent, no Active Directory or its equivalent.
- Stability, bugs, regressions, regression & regressions: There's an incredible amount regressions (both in the kernel and in user space applications) when things which used to work break inexplicably. There's basically no quality control and regression testing in most Open Source projects. Serious bugs which impede normal workflow can take years to be resolved. A lot of crucial hardware (e.g. GPUs, WiFi cards) isn't properly supported.
- Unwarranted & excessive variety: Too many Linux distros with incompatible and dissimilar configuration and packaging systems. Different distros employ totally different different desktop environments, different graphical and console applications for configuring your computer settings. E.g. Debian based distros require the usage of the strictly text based `dpkg-reconfigure` utility for system related maintenance.
- A lot of rapid changes: Most Linux distros have very short upgrade/release cycles (as short as six months in some cases, or e.g. Arch which is a rolling distro), thus you are constantly bombarded with changes you don't expect or don't want. LTS (long term support) distros are in most cases unsuitable for the desktop users due to the policy of preserving applications versions.
- Unstable API & lack of real compatibility: It's very difficult to use old open and closed source software in new distros (in many cases it becomes impossible due to changes in core Linux components like kernel or glibc). Almost non-existent backwards compatibility which makes it incredibly difficult and costly to create closed source applications for Linux distros.
- Open Source zealots: most vocal participants of the Open Source community are extremely bitchy and overly idealistic people peremptorily requiring everything to be open source and free or it has no right to exist at all in Linux. With an attitude like this, it's no surprise that a lot of companies completely disregard and shun the Linux desktop.
- No polish and no consistency.
Problem solved.
Linux desktops never endure - they become popular, gain prominence, and then they take a left turn. Mint is nice, but it is too dependent on Ubuntu, and Ubuntu is a sinking ship. As soon as Mint detaches from Ubuntu and becomes its own distro, they'll just do the same thing. It's what Linux distros do.
Desktop Linux blossoms, and then perishes - hard.
-- A change is as good as a reboot.
If you cant secure Windows, it's because you don't want to, and haven't bothered to figure out how to.
In my opinion there is scope for a nontrivial software business in providing a 100% (OK, realistically 99,999%) compatible VBA engine+API on OpenOffice. VBA apps are truely enabling business people to quickly implement their custom little pieces of software, which they would otherwise probably never get. Corporate Rules+Bureaucracy will prohibit a single department of simply acquiring a big PC and running Postgres+Python on that machine. Instead, they need to go to the central IT department and beg them to do that for them and run the application in the datacenter. Two years and 300K$ later it will be done. It will cost 50K$ per year to run that app in the glorious datacenter.
So instead, they will create complex VBA applications inside Excel, Access and Powerpoint. That level of programming is normally accepted, provided that they run it on their personal machines (often powerful laptops !!). Clearly an irrational, kafkaesque situation, but it clearly is here to stay. So dozens of billion dollars, euros, pounds and yen are stuffed into these VBA apps. What stops many of these people in adopting OpenOffice/Libreoffice is the lack of true VBA compatibility.
A company which can provide this VBA engine for OO (plus the APIs) could make a fortune. And yes, cripple the freeware version somehow (w/o violating the license - stuff it in an external process) and sell the "unrestricted" version for a reasonable fee of (say) 50 dollars/euros per seat.
After Nove$$ concquered SuSE and called it OpenSuSE, quality went into the crapper. They always wanted to bundle as many new features into their distro as possible. Quality assurance was of minor concern.
Meanwhile, Redhat was extremely conservative and waited for the new stuff to work out their problems before they adopted it. That paid off hugely, while Nove$$ is now what ? Bankrupt, sold, merged, for sale - what is the latest news ?
Linus Thorvalds grabbed into the shitbag and I really don't know why he chose so. He wouldn't have had these issues with CentOS or Ubuntu.
I think I should catch you and pin your little body unto a piece of paper. Below I will write "nice example of a FUD distributor who poses as a former Linux user and writes about his alleged negative experience with Linux. Certainly he claims to have returned to the benevolent tyranny of Windows after being unfaithful to Redmond. Typically, these bugs are paid 50 dollars per piece of FUD."
What do you think the malicious code jockeys would be targeting if, instead of Windows, Linux were king of the mountain?
"Yeah, sure, like anyone is going to believe THAT ... as the old meme says: [citation needed] (and since nobody ever talks about you, except yourself, this is gonna be a hard citation to find)" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 01, @04:33PM (#39861467)
First, you can write Mr. Steven Burn of malwarebytes/hpHosts on it here -> services@it-mate.co.uk as to what I put up next from emails from he and Symantec, PLUS, direct mail from ArcaVir as well (which I will produce excerpts here of both):
SYMANTEC:
Alexander,
Vikram just got back to me to let me know Symantec have now removed
the detection for your files.
Regards
Steven Burn
I.T. Mate
www.it-mate.co.uk
---
* That's regarding a "false positive" on a program I wrote that malwarebytes is hosting for me (dealing in hosts file mgt.) which Mr. Burn says IS 'excellent' & he's only seen a build from 2-3++ weeks ago (& it's gotten better still).
---
Secondly: Here's a reply from another "false positive" from ArcaVir/ArcaBit direct from the tech who analyzed the program I noted above & admitted false positive:
---
From: PaweÅ Pieniak
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 12:14 AM
To: Alexander Kowalski
Cc: support@arcabit.com
Subject: Re: ***SPAM*** PROOF OF FALSE POSITIVE (you folks don't seem to handle COMPRESSED EXECUTABLES correctly, see screenshot (po angelsku & po polsku bo ja jestem polak tesz albo od skod w Americze)... apk
Hello!
It`s a false positive. This false will be eliminated as soon as
posible.
In a letter dated 13 marca 2012 (16:28:12) was written :
---
Not enough? This was the BEST ONE, lol, due to some "ac troll" on /. sending me a link on a LOT of falsehoods being spouted on hosts files by a security site outta the UK:
---
http://security.stackexchange.com/questions/9795/any-additional-security-with-large-blacklisting-hosts-file
THE ORIGINAL REPLIES of both logicalscopy & pdubs, plus a general rebuttal of their points:
"I run Windows with a pretty hefty c:/windows/system32/drivers/etc/hosts file obtained from http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm. I update this file as regularly as I remember and layer it with appropriate add-ons in my modern web browser of choice, A/V, and firewall solutions. Basically, I realize that a large (generally static) blacklisting hosts file is protection against KNOWN threats (and only those with names!), and very little help against unknown and emerging threats (or straight up IPs). I must admit that I have not checked to see if there are stats regarding the attack/infection rates of new threats vs. known threats though I would expect that old, known threats probably still outweigh new threats simply due to volume. QUESTION: Is there any added value from running with a large (generally static) blacklisting hosts file when used with modern consumer-grade anti-virus and firewall solutions? Is it a redundant layer? I admit that A/V is generally a black box to me, so I'm not sure what kinds of signatures their engines scan for, and whether hostnames are part of those signatures. Although this seems like a free extra security layer, there are "costs" with manually updating the file, and the fact that I turn off DNS caching to prevent the whole file from hanging the machine each time it reloads itself (which can be frequent). (I've migrated DNS caching to the router instead which doesn't help me when I use my laptop elsewhere.)" - by logicalscope
ANSWER:
1.) Layered security/defense in depth - which you use but "oddly" have a problem in using hosts files also, & they're easily obtained as you've shown, regularly updated by reputable sites which you "strangely omit" as a FACT from said sources (There ar
The fact that you think he does not understand how Linux and open source software is put together shows a serious misunderstanding of what makes products (like operating systems and applications) successful on a wide scale in the "normal person" computer market.
Here is my $0.02 worth *opinion* of just a normal computer user, not a slashdot local:
Workplaces have a variety of concerns, like entrenched Windows-based tech support staff. So I have no idea what the problems with Linux adoption are there. but But home computers are another matter. Where I, as the dad, have to do everything.
I like to think that my home computer is used for IMPORTANT stuff. Grown up, manly, serious stuff.
But mostly, it's used by the kids, meaning playing simple games and watching silly YouTube videos. Videos made with Mario stuffed toys are absolutely crucial to my family's harmony at the moment, as are the wealth of Pokemon episodes on the official Pokemon site.
So, right now, that means Flash. It is *the* crucial element of any computer experience in our home.
And setting up Wine and then Flash (or whatever you're supposed to do) is, like, really tough, And when it doesn't work, did I set it up wrong? Is this computer messed up? Are the penguin gods angry with me?
I've tried to get all that stuff working on a confusing number of multiple iterations of Linux, on a variety of computers, over many years, including originally Linux based netbooks.
And I'm sorry to admit, but so far, I am 0 for 10. Complete failure.
So I have a garage full of partially-operating Linux computers gathering dust in the garage.
And my family lived non-Linuxy, ever after.
The End.
and completely satisfied. redhat9 -> fedora -> ubuntu
I don't see any need to switch to linux except for research/coding/geek reasons, and none of these are for average users.
It's kind of interesting how Linux fans brag about all of the software that comes pre-installed with every Linux distro but bitch and moan if any extra software is installed on a Windows box. Why isn't the software that you'll probably never use on a Linux box a bonus but gets called bloatware on Windows? I'd personally rather start with a blank slate or a standard image with standard programs that are always used by everyone (PDF reader, Office suite, Flash) than have to go through to uninstall a bunch of shit I won't use.
I'll tell you the main reason my company doesn't use Linux and restricts its usage - because it's FOSS. The integrity of the code is, at best, shaky. I'd also say that having an anonymous FTP, SSH, and HTTP server running on a box right from the get-go is a giant security hole and should be plugged up quickly if it won't be used. Also, have you heard of Windows PowerShell? It's pretty much the bee's knees for a shell (and is secured by default) and comes standard with Win7.
In a properly secured corporate Windows environment (basic AV/malware scanner and non-paper thin firewalls), malware is a non-issue and easily caught to be fixed. There's multiple good solutions for pushing non-MS software updates, Lumension being a step above the rest.
In a home environment, Linux is good enough for most anything except bleeding edge gaming. Gaming is a huge market for computers. Something that Linux cannot compete in without Wine which only works sometimes with some games and not easily configurable for the average end user. Most of Linux is really just not very friendly to your average end user even with a lot of the improvements I've seen the Linux desktop go through over the last decade. It's friendly to techies and computer savvy people but to average people, there's a steep(er) learning curve compared to Windows. Who here that installed Linux for their grand/parents didn't have to sit and show them some of the basics for getting around that would've been fairly intuitive on Windows?
If you are pissed someday by Mint, there will be at least one of CentOS, Fedora and Debian. Debian is actually the basis for Ubuntu and exists since 1996 !
Besides, there are lots of easy migration opportunities in the Open Source world. If they screw up the Linux kernel, you can easily use the xBSD or FreeSolaris kernels. They are just a recompilation away for 99% of programs. Shell scripts are equally 99% compatible and the only incompatible ones will be those which are used for system administration.
So, your post is a prediction of doom which is wholly unsubstantiated. Free Unix and Open Source is growing daily and it is only getting stronger. Diversity is a huge asset and the lack of diversity creates a lot of nightmares and lots of wasted hours for Windows users. See Ribbon UI, see the randomly permutated UIs of the config panel.
Simple version.
Read news in Combos. Any one IP-related story is bad enough, but take them in doubles or triples and ghastly things are emerging.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
So you are also a member of Microsoft 50 Cent Club ? Or is it the 64 cent club ?
There are lots of people around whose head is filled with concrete. And that concrete has all the Microsoft crap engraved. So if you can't give them the Ribbon crap, they will complain "Ohhh, but I am confused by the OO Menu". At least that is what the Microsoft shills wants to make people believe.
Never mind Microsoft randomly changes menus and config panel icons with every release. Never mind the Windows file security GUIs are simply broken. Microsoft products are the gold standard acoording to these retards.
All the professionals at Google, Facebook, Yahoo won't touch Windows with the proverbial ten-food pole. When they did in the past, they were badly burned. It was one of the bazillion security holes in Windows which allowed the Chinese to gain access to Gmail. These leading-edge corporations use Linux because it is a power tool in the hands of a skilled and well-trained system administrator. The shell is easily 1000% more productive than the GUI and it is easily 99% less error-prone if you want to do serious operations.
Now whatabout Windows ? It is the tool used by the Pointy-Haired Bosses and their minions who are all clueless about computers. Windows sports a Dumbass GUI for these ignorants. Look beneath the surface of MS Windows and you will find a Can Of Worms (Registry and system directories). Every program will bring 500 to 5000 new worms (registry keys and DLLs) and even experienced people won't know what they are supposed to do. If something breaks the Standard Operating Procedure is to reinstall the whole machine. With a professional Unix-oid operating system everything is configured via ASCII config files, which are human-readable, concise and modular. No need to reinstall a Linux machine just because the mail server has some issues. Look at the mail server config files, look at logs, turn on more diagnostics and you are done.
So Windows is the unprofessional tool.
Unless you are trying to get a piece of unsupported hardware working, a normal user should never have to touch the command line
So in other words, unless you're trying to actually use the hardware you paid for, you don't need the command line. But until Walmart and Best Buy start selling PCs with something well supported like Ubuntu on them, as opposed to previous short-lived experiments with consumer PCs that had an absolute crap distribution of X11/Linux, unsupported hardware will be the reality. And if you're trying to call programming students and hobbyists "abnormal", I rese(nt|mble) that remark.
and there being THREE fucking "User Data" folders in three different directories of each user's account.
I know what at least two of these folders are for. In Windows XP at least, ~/Application Data is for your roaming profile that follows you to any computer on the domain that you use, and ~/Local Settings is for your local profile specific to one computer. What's the third?
The Unix/Linux shell is easily 1000% more productive than the Windows GUI and it is easily 99% less error-prone if you want to do serious operations.
I would count that fact as a strong point with Linux. Linux will not disappoint you, but make you a satisfied user when you discover how few problems you actually have.
Compared to that, Windows is a big hairball, laced with chicken shit and then wrapped with a nice piece of colorful and reflecting paper. At some point, the user will scratch the surface and the ugly smell (Virus infections, registry rot, system getting gradually slower and slower over time) will leak out.
Linux will provide you out-of-the-box with Software RAID functionality:
http://www.linuxhomenetworking.com/wiki/index.php/Quick_HOWTO_:_Ch26_:_Linux_Software_RAID
This feature is used by many, many professional Linux users and it is known to be very reliable, which cannot be said about "hardware" RAID systems. All you need is to directly connect your drives (via SATA) to your mainboard. If you don't have enough connectors, just buy an PCI harddisk controller card which will do that.
Honestly, I suspect you are a scaremonger paid by Microsoft.
Perhaps you forgot, but this is a thread replying to a Slashdot article entitled "Why Desktop Linux hasn't taken off". Maybe you're mistaking me for Microsoft or someone who likes them.
Your "you can just jump ship" is exactly the underscore I'm talking about. Been there, done that. Can't remember how many window managers I've used, lost track of all the distros I've switched between. Ubuntu is merely the most recent and, probably, one of the most promising contenders: Unity makes a really nice netbook / laptop desktop.
No sooner had they gotten everyone calling Ubuntu the "rising star", the "desktop hopeful" than they lock sites on some specific target niche and leave everyone else with a "don't like it? just use a different distro/spin/flavor".
I'd be really happy to see the Mint team break the trend, but right now my hunch - based on everything I've seen - is that we'll see another Redhat/Fedora situation with Mint :(
It's a shame, I suspect Windows 8 is going to bomb worse than Vista did, at least on the desktop and for different reasons. This would be a great time for Canonical to refocus some of their efforts on their desktop support and be ready to catch some of the "I went back to Windows" types rebounding to Linux.
-- A change is as good as a reboot.
Diversity is a enormous asset of Linux and Unix in general. There is no single entity which could destroy Linux or OpenOffice, as there is with Windows and other commercial products.
See what Oracle tried to do to OpenOffice, see what Mr Shuttleworth tries to do to Ubuntu. Linux and other Open Source works around these Dictators-gone-mad. And after that, it is healthier than before. Even if Mr Thorvalds would go bonkers or get an offer from $Corporation to mess up Linux it would not matter. We would simply use the BSD kernel.
..is it's maturity. A very, very nasty aspect if your concern is the Micrsoft income stream. So they decided to End-of-life it. Millions of users would stick with XP for the next 30 years until they retire. But no - a new Windows Permuatation Down The Throats !
It seems whenever some expert Linux users/developers have a little free time a new Linux distribution is born. As of 2012, the total number of Linux distributions is north of 300. Some distributions are unique while others are derivatives of existing distributions. Starting from Slackware to Gentoo there are many philosophies behind these distributions. Diversity is a virtue and much appreciated. However, creating distributions for the mere sake of it is not going to increase the Desktop Linux user base. It will simply move users around unnecessarily.
For instance there are almost fifty distributions based on Ubuntu alone, including the unofficial ones. I assume these distributions are supposed to serve smaller group of users. In my opinion most of these new distributions operate by simply waiting for the Ubuntu release cycle, making a few apparently “necessary” changes, and then quickly following hot on their heels. Most of the time this so-called flavoring is nothing more than different sets of packages followed by a few UI tweaks and branding. Occasionally due to a lack of interest, either from users or developers, some of these derivatives disappear leaving users hanging. Some of these disgruntled users end up blaming Linux instead of the actual distribution in question.
Wouldn’t it be simpler to introduce a package repository so users can pick and choose which kind of user interface tweaking and applications they prefer instead opening up a whole new shop? Starting a distribution requires a lot of commitment and many times maintaining that level of commitment is just not possible over an extended period of time. It may be easier to write an application that adds or removes the necessary packages and repositories to the parent distribution, thus serving the same purpose. Maintaining an application seems a much less resource intensive task and serving the exact same purpose.
Source http://qubitlogic.com/2012/04/why-this-is-not-the-year-of-desktop-linux/
Linux/Unix does not support that MS hairball "SMB/CIFS" fully ? And certainly you cannot be fucked to lock down that Linux machine using transparent and rock-solid Linux tools such as AppArmor, LDAP and so on ? Horrible !!
If you knew anything about programming languages, you would know that Delphi is an excellent IDE. It compiles faster than any c++ compiler (because the module concept is not broken as in C++). The executables are about as efficient as C++ programs. So you get the development efficiency of Visual Basic paired with the runtime efficiency of C++. That is still impressive !
"1. host file does not protect against new threats, the most dangerous ones (AV protect us against old threat anyway), it will take days/weeks/months before you're "protected" again. host file is thus outdated before even being released" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02, @04:21PM (#39872377)
Oh, really? My 15++ sources for known hosts-domains/sites-servers that are KNOWN to be malscripted OR serve up malwares, say otherwise... And, every 15 minutes! That's FASTER & MORE FREQUENTLY THAN ANTIVIRUS UPDATES!
I update my hosts that frequently here... & what you can't touch, you cannot be burned by... period.
---
"2. your host file is overly bloated" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02, @04:21PM (#39872377)
There is NO BLOAT in mine... in fact, the program I created that members of the security community I noted say is excellent, does that for me.
---
"so either it runs slowly" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02, @04:21PM (#39872377)
First - it's cached just like the faulty local DNS client (except it works on larger hosts files w/out screwing up) via the local kernelmode diskcache subsystem, OR in Windows, SuperFetch...
Second - That's as FAST AS IT GETS EITHER WAY fool (for site access or blocks, via DNS clientside cache service, OR, diskcaches + superfetch).
Third - I'll let others from this very website speak their minds on what hosts files can do for your websurfing speeds (just by blocking adbanners AND hardcoding your fav. sites into them too (which also increases reliability and security))
---
22++ SLASHDOT USERS EXPERIENCING SUCCESS USING HOSTS FILES QUOTED VERBATIM:
---
"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ and http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)
"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal
"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal
"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17, @11:20AM (#38086752) Homepage Journal
"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)
"Better than an ad blocker, imo. Hosts file entries: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm " - by TempestRose (1187397) on Tuesday March 15, @12:53PM (#35493274)
So, these comments have made depressing reading (okay so i only read about 300 hundred or so). Slashdot is a site that is supposed to be News for Nerds, and is famed for having a strong Linux-using (the nerd part) reader base, not to mention heritage. Yet, so many of the comments (and the highly rated ones, at that) have been by clearly very inexperienced, and ignorant PC/Mac users whining about how they couldn't do something they way the were used to, and who, rather than learning how to do it, gave up, and proceed to claim it can't be done in Linux, or is too difficult, or that the mean forum members were so wude to them (i experienced nothing but friendly help, and advice, provided FOR FREE, in the forums, concerning many different distros, when i was a noob). Perhaps if you tried to HELP YOURSELVES first and thus refined your knowledge of the problem, you would get more effective advice. Honestly, you should all go over and swell the ranks of Lifehacker. It's not that i am being elitist, you are just literally wasting everybody's time by spewing inaccuracies and inanities.
1. You're wrong (either lying by omission or misunderstanding): if I (hypothetically) create a website serving malware right now, you are saying that your host file will get upgraded within 15 minutes and that my malicious website will be in that upgrade ... well good luck with that ... so you're wrong.
2. define bloat + I said either (it runs slowly or you have to cache it), you're taking portion of text out of context, but whatever
3. and you're telling me that a linear line-by-line search of a (even cached) host file is faster than a DB query or a binary search ... just plain wrong (on average)
4. You're avoiding answering the question (cause you don't like the answer): if those website you trust so much get hacked someday (which is likely, as for any website), you have the exact same problem as with DNS poisoning. All your reasoning could be applied to DNS servers ("well known respected blabla). So you have the exact same problem as DNS poisoning, FACT. Admitted by yourself by avoiding answering the question
5. So the huge marketshare of linux in server and routers since like ... forever (end of the 90's) means that it should get a lot of attention, per your reasoning (you know billions of users that could get hurt by surfing hacked websites and all that). Don't get me wrong, it happened, happens and will happen again that linux server get hacked, but not to the extend to which Windows has been between 95 and Vista (don't know about 7 which seems like an improvement to me). Oh wait, actually what you're trying to say is that more Windows get hacked because it has more idiotic users with IE6 ready to install any "natalieportman.exe" file on their computer whereas server admin don't do such things and that's what make Windows more exploitable, and that it has nothing to do with marketshare ? is that it ?
6. So you're deliberately creating a confusion between a "remote exploit" (that you say you know what it means) and the fact that once installed (by some stupid user) a trojan becomes "remotely exploitable" whenever people ask you about a "remote exploit" in android. So no "remote exploit" in Android then ? (I won't go as far as accusing you of "bad faith", but you're getting close). I note though that you're no security expert and will not hesitate to remind it to you next time you try to have a word in a security-related conversation (you know, just like nobody can call you crazy because he/she doesn't have a PhD in psychiatry).
7. Point granted by not answering, you were wrong about Duqu, fine, let's not talk about it any more (until you piss off someone again)
8. Too bad, it would have been fun getting rid of you
"if I (hypothetically) create a website serving malware right now, you are saying that your host file will get upgraded within 15 minutes and that my malicious website will be in that upgrade ... well good luck with that ... so you're wrong." - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, @03:28AM (#39876369)
1st - The odds of my hitting it, or being stupid enough to, is astronmically low first of all!
2nd - It is a fact I update my hosts files vs. that FASTER than the "solutions" you noted in antivirus/antispywares... period.
(You're 'knocked-out' & "right-off-the-bat" from the get-go/start... I love it!)
---
"2. define bloat + I said either (it runs slowly or you have to cache it), you're taking portion of text out of context, but whatever" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, @03:28AM (#39876369)
No bloat in my hosts file equals several things (that other hosts file makers leave in their hosts files):
---
1.) No comments
2.) No useless trailing blanks on record lines
3.) No trailing comments AFTER valid record line data
4.) Removal of non-valid TLD record based data
5.) The conversion of hosts file entries from the larger & slower to parse + load leading 127.0.0.1 loopback adapter address for blocking known malware serving OR malscripted sites to the faster & smaller 0.0.0.0
---
(Understand now?)
You used the term "bloat", fool - my hosts file HAS none of the above, which IS "bloat" in a hosts file... it's "all business", no fat.
And what follows this part of my reply below this "tops that off" perfectly as well, on the note of "bloat" (I am a poet, & I KNOW IT, lol - pun intended):
---
"3. and you're telling me that a linear line-by-line search of a (even cached) host file is faster than a DB query or a binary search ... just plain wrong (on average)" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, @03:28AM (#39876369)
LOL, you really ARE stupid, aren't you?
HOSTS file data (again) gets cached into memory first of all, in smaller hosts files by the faulty local DNS caching client service in Windows, OR, by the local kernelmode diskcaching subsystem or SuperFetch.
Secondly, the ONLY part of my hosts file that would NEED binary searches & would matter for it would be the users' favorite entries!
ALL others would be blocked (in my case here, 250/1,773,752 only of entries as favorites which is FAR larger than most folks will use & on such a limited set, binary seeks don't make a perceptible difference!)
The rest would be blocked off (as in known bad sites/servers), so going "fast" to them is MOOT, you're not going to get to them anyhow to protect your system.
So, for the "typical user"?
I.E.-> I'd imagine they only have 20 entries or so as favorite websites. They couldn't even BEGIN to perceive the benefits of a b-tree speed-gain on that few of entries (I certainly don't with 10x that many!).
NOW, the "downside tradeoffs" of using local DNS servers (many):
NOW - you talked "bloat"? TIME TO BLOW YOU AWAY ON THAT ACCOUNT & YOUR USAGE OF A LOCAL DNS SERVER IN A SEPARATE SYSTEM, or, AS YET ANOTHER PROGRAM PERFORMING OPERATIONS ON A SINGLE MACHINE:
---
1.) YOU ARE BLOATING MEMORY WITH A LOCAL DNS SERVER, FIRST OF ALL, in services, front-end software, & more like its data, needlessly!
2.) YOU ARE TEARING UP RAM FOR NO GOOD REASON SINCE A HOSTS FILE CAN DO THE SAME @ THE FASTEST LEVEL OF ACCESS POSSIBLE (Ring 0/RPL 0/KernelMode)
3.) YOU ARE LAYERING ON UNECESSARY SOFTWARE DOING THAT EVEN MORE USING A LOCAL DNS SERVER!
4.) YOU ARE TEARING UP I/O IN OTHER FORMS AS WELL FOR THE SAME LAST 2 REASONS NOTED ABOVE.
5.) YOU ARE EATING MORE ELECTRIC POWER THAN I DO (since hosts are only a filter for a VERY efficient subsystem in the TCP/IP stack running i
TL;DR: APK is dead wrong and waste a huge amount of electricity answering (and he doesn't like to waste electricity, that's why he's using host file btw).
1. 1st - The odds of you being stupid enough to hit it is astronomically high, first of all. ... period.
2nd - It is a fact antivirus/antispywares update FASTER than the "solutions" you noted in host files
2. ok, we have opposite definition of "bloat" and "business" ... so we're both right and wrong, call it a Schrodinger's cat ... (oh my, is he stupid ... hum, the cat I mean, hum ...)
3. "the ONLY part of my hosts file that would NEED binary searches & would matter for it would be the users' favorite entries!" and here you proove that you have no idea what you're saying ... 1.7 million lines, it's worse than I imagined ...
4. So your host file is useless for security then ? it's only useful for speed gain ? Plus, "anonimity gain" because you don't make DNS query, who do you think you're kidding with that ? I hope you're your own ISP, because they track you, you know, they record *everything*.
5. Why all of a sudden do you combine marketshares on "PC's/Laptops/Servers" ? oh yes, because it gives the impression that your logical fallacy is not one. Linux dominates the server and router market, billions of users, and still it's not pwned as much as Windows is. Present it as you like, you fail. And you still don't know that by definition "security through obscurity" cannot refer to opensource system such as linux. Never. Period. "Security through minority" could, but again the server situation proves otherwise. You Fail. Linux is the most used in servers and routers and DNS and mainframes, and still it's not the most attacked ... Wonder why ?
6. So we agree: a trojan is not a "remote exploit" ?
7. Mmmh, it started it all Peter, it started it all.
8. You might need these: Anecdotal evidence, Logical Fallacy, because you're full of it.
At least now I'm sure you have no life and no job because of the length of your answers ... See you later apk-the-troll, that was fun.
"1. 1st - The odds of you being stupid enough to hit it is astronomically high, first of all. ... period." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:17AM
2nd - It is a fact antivirus/antispywares update FASTER than the "solutions" you noted in host files
WRONG... lol, I personally haven't seen faster updates out of antivirus/antispyware programs than what I can & DO do for hosts files... & I've tried/used quite a few since I started using PC's in from early 1990 onwards.
Antivirus &/or Antispyware updates typically are FAR farther apart than every 15 minutes I do for hosts file data updates from 17++ reputable sources I noted in total (ones that members of the security community I noted either highly esteem or use themselves, such as ZEUS or SPYEYE botnet trackers + hpHosts (malwarebytes) for examples I used of that group I noted).
---
"2. ok, we have opposite definition of "bloat" and "business" ... so we're both right and wrong, call it a Schrodinger's cat ... (oh my, is he stupid ... hum, the cat I mean, hum ...)" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:17AM
WTF are you trying to say here?
---
"3. "the ONLY part of my hosts file that would NEED binary searches & would matter for it would be the users' favorite entries!" and here you proove that you have no idea what you're saying ... 1.7 million lines, it's worse than I imagined " - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:17AM
The HUGE MAJORITY of which is blocked sites, and for most folks so they will NEVER GET TO THEM so parsing to them 'faster' via indexing is NO HELP
(Nor are or WERE they intended to be gotten to faster, but again, instead they're BLOCKED OFF - as they're KNOWN servers of malicious script &/or malware OR bogus DNS servers etc./et al).
The HUGE MINORITY (250 of 1.7 million++ only), of which most folks have MAYBE 10-20 sites, are hardcoded & @ the TOP of the hosts file my program creates, & don't even BEGIN to show a perceivable gain in speed by B-TREE seeks...
However - Folks I posted quoted replies from, in many /. users & even the quote from a security pro Mr. Oliver Day too, see HUGE GAINS in websurfing speeds by using custom hosts files for hardcoding their favorites into them, OR by blocking adbanners... NOTICEABLE gains ...
"4. So your host file is useless for security then ?
it's only useful for speed gain ?
Plus, "anonimity gain" because you don't make DNS query, who do you think you're kidding with that ? I hope you're your own ISP, because they track you, you know, they record *everything*." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:17AM
Not with DNS request logs for my hardcoded favorites they don't & CAN'T if I don't query a DNS server of theirs? No possible tracking & hardcodes of my favs even avoids the remote DNS servers I do use here, in Norton DNS, OpenDNS, &/or ScrubIT DNS (all filtering ones vs. malware/phishing & more) &, in "triumvirate-zonedefense-phalanx formation" in both my routers AND Windows DNS settings layered on with hosts files for security (by blocking known bogus hosts-domains + DNS servers & more that is malicious).
---
"5. Why all of a sudden do you combine marketshares on "PC's/Laptops/Servers" ? oh yes, because it gives the impression that your logical fallacy is not one. Linux dominates the server and router market, billions of users, and still it's not pwned as much as Windows is. Present it as you like, you fail. And you still don't know that by definition "security through obscurity" cannot refer to opensource system such as linux. Never. Period. "Security through minority" could, but
1. It's no use to upgrade you host list every 15 minutes if it takes you weeks to get my (hypothetical) malware website in that list. Antivirus will get that in their lists way faster than you. Period.
3. "of which most folks have MAYBE 10-20 sites, are hardcoded & @ the TOP". Finally, there we are, you said it (took me 3 days to drive you there ...), "at the TOP". it's fast because they're only 10-100 and at the TOP, it's the only reason it's fast, and you don't even seem to realize it, you idiot.
4. You seem to think that once you got the IP adress in your host file you don't need ISPs to route your packets 'til their destination (and thus knowing exactly what you're doing, whether you use their DNS or not doesn't matter) ... you really seriously think that ?
5. So it's a 50/50 in Fortune 500 (and about 65/30 overall for Linux/Windows) and still you claim "security through obscurity(/minority, whatever)" (nevermind the fact that Windows is subject to more successful attacks than linux) ? I hope you finally realize how much that didn't make sense
6. A trojan is remotely exploitable once installed, it is NOT a remote exploit (except for your very illogical definition of remote exploit, it seems). So no, no remote exploit (based on that fallacious argument about trojan at least) on Android yet. It's like calling SSH a remote exploit once you get my password (which wouldn't work because I always disable ssh password-based login, only key-based login, but let's not digress, it was for the sake of the example).
8. You're dusted dude. Right now you must be crying like the childish thing you are. Besides you started the ad hominem attacks, not me, I'm just answering.
"3. "of which most folks have MAYBE 10-20 sites, are hardcoded & @ the TOP". Finally, there we are, you said it (took me 3 days to drive you there ...), "at the TOP". it's fast because they're only 10-100 and at the TOP, it's the only reason it's fast, and you don't even seem to realize it, you idiot." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @02:43AM (#39887251)
IT IS FAST THOUGH and @ the top of my hosts file MAKES IT FASTER & A B-TREE WOULDN'T APPRECIABLY SPEED UP 10-20 FAVORITE SITES ENOUGH TO NOTICE IT FOR USERS - period!
However:
Users SURELY DO notice blocking adbanners, & hardcoding their favorites into a hosts file gaining them speed, screen realestate back, security, & more...
Again, some testimonials thereof from your PEERS here on /., and again, a noted security pro in Mr. Oliver Day of SECURITYFOCUS to that very effect (a division of SYMANTEC/NORTON):
---
22++ SLASHDOT USERS EXPERIENCING SUCCESS USING HOSTS FILES QUOTED VERBATIM:
---
"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ and http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)
"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal
"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal
"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17, @11:20AM (#38086752) Homepage Journal
"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)
"Better than an ad blocker, imo. Hosts file entries: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm " - by TempestRose (1187397) on Tuesday March 15, @12:53PM (#35493274)
"^^ One of the many reasons why I like the user-friendliness of the /etc/hosts file." - by lennier1 (264730) on Saturday March 05, @09:26PM (#35393448)
"They've been on my HOSTS block for years" - by ScottCooperDotNet (929575) on Thursday August 05 2010, @01:52AM (#33147212)
"I'm currently only using my hosts file to block pheedo ads from showing up in my RSS feeds and causing them to take forever to load. Regardless of its original intent, it's still a valid tool, when used judiciously." - by Bill Dog (726542) on Monday April 25, @02:16AM (#35927050) Homepage Journal
1. I repeat because you avoided the point (cause you don't like the answer): It's no use to upgrade a host file every 15 minutes if it takes weeks to get my (hypothetical) malware website in that list from your "reputable" sources. the malicious website will not appear in your list within 15 minutes no 30, nor 45. It will appear a few days/weeks later, when it's already too late. Period.
3. at the top, so all your points about superfetch, cache and so on are moot. you're dusted
4. Where? Go re-read yourself: "Not with DNS request logs for my hardcoded favorites they don't & CAN'T if I don't query a DNS server of theirs? No possible tracking". There you're buried, I'm not twisting your words: "No possible tracking" is pretty hard to twist.
5. Therefore you admit that your argument about "security-by-obscurity" is flawed and fallacious (neverming the inapropriate term since linux being opensource it is thus not "obscurity"-reliant). you're drowned
6. trojan are NOT remote exploits for any known definition of "remote exploit" (except your own). and there you are, dusted, buried and drowned
8. as said above, dusted, buried, drowned, twice. You should stop before you turn into a zombie :-)
BTW as a reminder: you really should remove Culture20's comment of your list cause it was an obvious sarcasm which apparently you cannot detect. The '+5 Funny' mod is a huge clue though.
"3. at the top, so all your points about superfetch, cache and so on are moot. you're dusted" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:20PM (#39892495)
What? You really ARE STUPID, aren't you?? Being cached avoids diskbound accesses of files (you REALLY need to, again, review WHY CACHING IS USED, you utter fool... lol!)
---
"4. Where? Go re-read yourself: "Not with DNS request logs for my hardcoded favorites they don't & CAN'T if I don't query a DNS server of theirs? No possible tracking". There you're buried, I'm not twisting your words: "No possible tracking" is pretty hard to twist." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:20PM (#39892495)
I never said "no possible tracking" - please: SHOW US WHERE I EXPLICITLY SAID THAT (good luck - I never did... you are BLOWING IT every time, lol).
---
"It's no use to upgrade a host file every 15 minutes if it takes weeks to get my (hypothetical) malware website in that list from your "reputable" sources. the malicious website will not appear in your list within 15 minutes no 30, nor 45. It will appear a few days/weeks later, when it's already too late. Period.}" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:20PM (#39892495)
By the same token? Using "reverse psychology" on it: The odds of ME hitting it is astronomically low... & when the sites I get hosts file data from get it, I do, every 15 minutes (FAR faster than your "solution" in antivirus/antispyware typically do)... so your "so-called 'point'", as-per-YOUR-usual? Nullified... in 2 ways!
---
"5. Therefore you admit that your argument about "security-by-obscurity" is flawed and fallacious (neverming the inapropriate term since linux being opensource it is thus not "obscurity"-reliant). you're drowned" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:20PM (#39892495)
Flawed? FAR FROM IT: Once ANY OS, on ANY COMPUTING PLATFORM, because "most used"? It's going to become the PREFERRED TARGET for malware makers... both Windows &/or ANDROID (a Linux) illustrate this perfectly in fact!
---
"6. trojan are NOT remote exploits for any known definition of "remote exploit" (except your own). and there you are, dusted, buried and drowned" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:20PM (#39892495)
Definitions? Mincing words can't help you... once a trojan's "in" it does INDEED, become "remotely exploitable" (hence exactly what botnets & their herders, do, back to C&C servers (which my hosts file also blocks)).
---
"8. as said above, dusted, buried, drowned, twice. You should stop before you turn into a zombie :-)" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:20PM (#39892495)
Ya, right - you had a LOT more "points" & see above, each of what you had left as 'aces' are being nuked by "yours truly", 'point-by-so-called-'point''... easily. Too easily...
--
"BTW as a reminder: you really should remove Culture20's comment of your list cause it was an obvious sarcasm which apparently you cannot detect. The '+5 Funny' mod is a huge clue though." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:20PM (#39892495)
How would YOU know that? Hmmm??
APK
P.S.=> You have burned yourself, and clearly make plain the fact that YOU do NOT have the intellect, or even WILL, much less technical expertise & understanding, to ever "get the best of me"... lol! Man... you KNOW I've just GOTTA say it (again):
This? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'"...
... apk
1. you say that you get it faster. for one you have no source to prove it, for two, it still takes days/weeks before you're "protected", so yes, you (or anyone relying on your "guide") are doomed. you loose.
3. and you are an idiot, I didn't say caching was useless (it is useful and fast as opposed to disk I/O), but it's moot as a point for how fast your access to website has become "thanks" to your host file. your host file grant faster access to favs because they're at the top of the file they're at the top, they're at the top (at the top of your linear search on 1.7M entries, remember). Are you that dense ? no, you must be answering in bad faith because you've been dusted. impossible otherwise.
4. You lie: you said that there, in comment #39886991, below the section "4. So your host file is useless for security then ?", as I quoted literally, without modification (copy/pasted): "Not with DNS request logs for my hardcoded favorites they don't & CAN'T if I don't query a DNS server of theirs? No possible tracking". read again: "No possible tracking" . And in last post you said "I never said "no possible tracking" ". So is you memory that short ? no you're just a proven liar and troll. you're buried and your lie is exposed to the world.
5. It's going to become the prefered target, but it's not going to become the most flawed/exploited/pwned/hacked. Linux for servers is a good example: per your reasoning it should be the prefered target (getting your hands on some servers can mean access to billions of users every day) and still it is not hacked as much as windows is.
6. For the zillionth time, admit it: trojan is not a remote exploit, has never been, cannot be, will never be. When people ask you to show them a remote exploit for Android don't show them link to trojan infections, it is not a remote exploit. There certainly are already or will be one day remote exploits for Android, I'm 100% sure of that, but trojans are not. You're wrong, wrong, wrong on this one, anyone can tell you. just admit it and be done with it. Period.
8. current score is 5-2-0 (me/tie/apk), tie for point 2 and 3, other point won by me until now, not counting section '8' because it's not an actual point. You're losing the game Peter.
I use GNU/Linux both for personal and business use. I couldn't be happier, and it's MORE than capable. Why hasn't GNU/Linux taken off on the desktop? Because Microsoft has locked in users for decades, and it's a very expensive and bold move to make a change to anything else. But... it CAN be done, and has been done in European countries. I really don't know why U.S. companies are afraid to make the move. The most common problems as a GNU/Linux user that I face are with websites malformed and programmed to only work with Windows. It's a shame that their developers don't know better. I work around the problems using Wine and VirtualBox. 99% of websites that I use are platform independent and the applications I use on GNU/Linux are free and open, which means there's no more fees every couple of years. I've deployed GNU/Linux PCs for family and friends and they are extremely happy. Everything is there, it's up to the users to just make the switch.
"4. You lie - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @02:52PM (#39893819)
That was specifically in regards to DNS request logs, where I show they cannot track you...
Thus, YOU LOSE/YOU FAIL, as usual & anyone can read it here now too, in my requoting myself on it WITH the actual link & text + context I used (regarding DNS tracking logs)...
(Where you not only PARTIALLY QUOTED ME, a weak "troll tactic", but altered my post when you did in your last reply (doubly weak)).
These were my original words, used in the context of DNS request logs, specifically:
"Not with DNS request logs for my hardcoded favorites they don't & CAN'T if I don't query a DNS server of theirs? No possible tracking" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @01:45AM (#39886991) FROM -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39886991
Plus, I even specifically noted in my replies here that DPI can track you, but they do NOT do THAT to everyone...
(U FAIL AS USUAL & on bogus tactics too... lol!)
---
"1. you say that you get it faster. for one you have no source to prove it"" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @02:52PM (#39893819)
WTF? Ok - Check how often Norton SafeWeb for example, updates (They're another one of my respected security community sources I didn't mention earlier alongside ZEUS & SPYEYE trackers, + hpHosts/malwarebytes too) here:
http://safeweb.norton.com/buzz
* AGAIN, "U FAIL"... totally "EPIC FAIL #2", lol...
---
"for two, it still takes days/weeks before you're "protected", so yes, you (or anyone relying on your "guide") are doomed. you loose." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @02:52PM (#39893819)
LOL, considering I don't use JAVA, javascript, Adobe plugins OR others? How can I be "infested"?? Clue - I can't... those are the things used against users by malware makers... lol!
(I do it via Opera's options for this BY SITE, & by default, I keep it OFF for all sites, & only make exceptions for ones I KNOW are safe that I need to activate them on (plus, I haven't had an infection of ANY KIND since 1996/16++ years now as proof too)).
Plus again - I DO GET UPDATES TO MY HOSTS FILE EVERY 15 MINUTES (quicker if I wish too) & FROM SITES THAT ARE REPUTABLE SECURITY SITES and respected too! The odds of my entering your malicious site you intend to create before I update it is astronomical as well, and I won't click on links you post either...
(Man, are you dumb!)
---
"3. and you are an idiot, I didn't say caching was useless (it is useful and fast as opposed to disk I/O), but it's moot as a point for how fast your access to website has become "thanks" to your host file." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @02:52PM (#39893819)
Well, since my word isn't good enough on how much speed gain one gets from a custom HOSTS file? Once more:
I'll post your /. peers who gained speed, as well as Mr. Oliver Day a security expert from SYMANTEC/NORTON division, SecurityFocus:
A RETURN TO THE KILLFILE:
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491
Some "PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS" to back up my points with (for starters):
---
"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."
---
"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ and
"1. It certainly doesn't prove that if I (hypothetically) put a malicious website online you'll get it faster in your hostfile than them in their own list. you loose, luser" - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @06:32PM (#39896969)
Faster than from YOUR "solutions" in antivirus/antispyware... that's certain, because they don't update every 15 minutes - you're wrong as usual there and "strangely" (lol, NOT), have given up on that on your part.
Much as how you stated the security community was laughing @ me & my ideas on the hosts file, but funny how I had a member of the security community itself state he was going FASTER websurfing online using custom hosts files (along with many others from this website also).
Explain that.
---
"3. and as soon as you want to visit any website that is not in your host, the whole file must be searched first (1.7M lines) and of course not found, before eventually asking outside, making it so slow that it's unbearable. You're condemned to surf only your favs and nothing else because it would be too slow. point granted to me, you loose." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @06:32PM (#39896969)
Searched @ the speed of cached memory - AND, THE SAME THING HAPPENS IN LOCAL DNS CLIENTSIDE CACHING TOO - so, what's your point here?
(BOTH are done in memory as well (but the local clientside DNS caching service in Windows messes up when you have a larger hosts files, so diskcaches &/or SuperFetch do the job better instead, eliminating the NEED to use the redundant & clearly faulty local DNS ClientSide caching service + wasting CPU cycles, RAM, & other forms of I/O on it, instead letting the local kernelmode/ring 0/rpl 0 diskcache do the job (or SuperFetch))).
You clearly do evade tracking with DNS request logs using hosts file hardcodes of your favorites, and by what I stated, in my noting that if you don't call out to a remote DNS server, you never get ON A DNS REQUEST LOG (no possible tracking in them).
---
"4. You lie twice: I never partially quoted you, the two times I have put the context just before. Second lie: you never ever said "No possible tracking via DNS request logs". What you said was (again): "Not with DNS request logs for my hardcoded favorites they don't & CAN'T if I don't query a DNS server of theirs? No possible tracking", so "one sentence related to DNS log + a question mark (i.e. a punctuation) + "No possible tracking". I know you have some problems with correct writing style, punctuations and English in general, but trying to undo what you did there is impossible. The sentence you wrote has a completely different meaning than the one you're trying to make us believe that you meant. And since you're a proven troll I will certainly not believe in your good faith in this. YOU FAILED miserably and you're trying to do some magic trick to turn it into something it isn't. YOU'RE A LIAR. Period." - by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 04, @06:32PM (#39896969)
Bwaaah - YOU FAIL: I clearly used that in CONTEXT (same sentences in the same paragraph) with DNS request logs, and it is the TRUTH!
Thus, your attempt @ twisting my words isn't working. Learn to read...
---
"5. Now you contradict yourself (again): a) my whole quote: "Linux for servers is a good example: per your reasoning it should be the prefered target (getting your hands on some servers can mean access to billions of users every day) and still it is not hacked as much as windows is." b) the article you quote: Sites built on Linux, Apache, MySQL and PHP are the favoured targets of phishing attackers. Conclusion: a) it is indeed the preferred target but b) it is not hacked exploited as much as windows is (fact, period.). YOU are saying/implying/trolling that since it is the preferred target it is necessarily more exploited. It is not. It is more targe
Wherever you see the term "QUESTION #", or a question mark? Answer & DISPROVE my points (which have backing from the security community a few times no less, & you stated they "laugh @ me", didn't you?)
QUESTION #1: Are these people FASTER or SLOWER websurfing w/ custom HOSTS files here (your /. peers AND a security expert (from a division of SYMANTEC/NORTON & yet you said "the security community was laughing @ me & my ideas on hosts files" didn't you?))?
---
E.G. #1 - The words of a security expert, Oliver Day (SECURITYFOCUS) CLEARLY disagree w/ you:
A RETURN TO THE KILLFILE:
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491
Some "PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS" to back up my points with (for starters):
---
"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."
CLEARLY - Speed is a gain... Mr. Day note it as well & he IS a 'security expert' who does work for SYMANTEC/NORTON via their securityfocus.com site... & you said security experts were laughing @ me on my ideas on hosts files?
(QUESTION #2: Explain that too... is that security expert "laughing @ me" & my points on hosts files? Clearly, no...)
---
QUESTION #3: Are these /. forums members going FASTER or SLOWER using custom HOSTS files?
8++ SLASHDOT USERS EXPERIENCING SUCCESS USING HOSTS FILES FOR SPEED, QUOTED VERBATIM:
---
"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ and http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)
"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal
"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal
"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17, @11:20AM (#38086752) Homepage Journal
"I'm currently only using my hosts file to block pheedo ads from showing up in my RSS feeds and causing them to take forever to load. Regardless of its original intent, it's still a valid tool, when used judiciously." - by Bill Dog (726542) on Monday April 25, @02:16AM (#35927050) Homepage Journal
"I'm tempted to go for a hacked hosts file that simply resolves most advert sites to 127.0.0.1" - by bLanark (123342) on Tuesday December 13, @01:13PM (#38357760)
"A hosts file certainly does not require "a lot of work" to maintain, and it quite effectively kills a LOT of advertising and tracking schemes. . In fact, I never would have considered try
The bad faith you've shown in all your answers proves once and for all that you're trolling. So I win on all accounts but the ties.
1. you don't get my (hypothetical) malicious website in 15 minutes in your host file, it takes days/weeks, so you lie and you're wrong. AV get it much faster than you.
3. So why don't you try putting your favs at the bottom of your host file if it doesn't change the speed of query ? you lose.
4. You lie, proven fact. Not the same sentence (clue: punctuation), learn to write and then maybe people will understand what it is that you're trying to say. you lose and are a proven liar.
5. No, that's not what I'm saying, I'm saying: "it is less exploited than windows is, although they are both a very interesting target and linux's server are targeted at least as much as windows is, per your own reasoning."
6. QUESTION: Are trojans used for botnets being installed LOCALLY by users before they can be accessed remotely ? YES. And actually you know it very well, that's why you never write anywhere "trojans are remote exploits", you always write "trojans are remotely exploited". In all your bad faith you cannot admit you're wrong, but you know that saying "trojan are remote exploits" is BS, so you don't write it, instead you try to sneak around with faulty logic, you always say: "trojans are remotely exploited" out of context. The full contex that you should write if you were honest should be: "trojans are remotely exploited once they are locally installed through user interaction". But you won't write this honest statement because you're not honest. Now I dare you to write either "trojan are remote exploits" (BS) or "trojans are remotely exploited once they are locally installed through user interaction" (reality, not a remote exploit then, since user interaction is required). You won't dare because you're a dishonest troll (I know, pleonasm).
8. You had two user account on IT security user 9122 and user 9143. 9143 has been banned and can now only be accessed through google's cache, and your illogical question ("Why has this website intentionally posted ERRONEOUS misleading information?") has been deleted as well, accessible only through google's cache (and soon to disappear even from there I guess). You loose
As for your questions, I can answer them all with one single link proving your logical fallacies: Anecdotal evidence and faulty logic. Of course you won't read nor understand it.
Here -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39901099
(Stop avoiding that - I answered your questions and blew you away on each one... which is WHY you avoid the link above & answering the questions I ask of YOU!)
---
"As for your questions, I can answer them all with one single link proving your logical fallacies: Anecdotal evidence and faulty logic. Of course you won't read nor understand it." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 06, @06:45AM (#39907027)
LOL, then your stating that hosts make others slower on YOUR PART is merely "anecdotal evidence" from ONLY YOU (whereas I had you outnumbered massively with contrary evidence from your peers here on /., AND, from a security pro).
On that note of "security pros":
Didn't YOU state the security community was "laughing @ me" regarding my ideas on HOSTS files?
Funny - I posted the words of one who completely AGREES with my points on hosts files!
(No, the ONLY PERSON LAUGHING here is myself, @ YOU!)
---
"The bad faith you've shown in all your answers proves once and for all that you're trolling. So I win on all accounts but the ties." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 06, @06:45AM (#39907027)
WTF? I answered questions you ask, and I BLEW THEM AWAY each time (&, you along with them, of course).
(Simply since I quote your replies & respond to them, & I "overcame your objections" with EASE... )
Do the same now on YOUR END, & answer MY QUESTIONS in the link above... are you AFRAID TO?
Apparently so.
---
"1. you don't get my (hypothetical) malicious website in 15 minutes in your host file, it takes days/weeks, so you lie and you're wrong. AV get it much faster than you.." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 06, @06:45AM (#39907027)
LMAO - I showed you how often a respected source of bad IP addresses (for Windows powershell based firewall entry addons) & bad host-domain names (even bad DNS servers) for hosts file entries updates...
Which Norton's "SafeWeb" site, & that is MUCH faster than Antivirus/Antispywares can & do updates of their data, and I get them as soon as they do "automagically"... right into my custom hosts file also.
---
"3. So why don't you try putting your favs at the bottom of your host file if it doesn't change the speed of query ? you lose.." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 06, @06:45AM (#39907027)
QUESTION: Why should I make my favorite websites I visit take longer to parse & load from memory in caches be slower?
After all - I made them AS FAST AS POSSIBLE with optimum placement in the hosts file, & YOU KNOW IT!
(Which "blew away" your MAIN "so-called 'point'" with ease...)
---
"4. You lie, proven fact. Not the same sentence (clue: punctuation), learn to write and then maybe people will understand what it is that you're trying to say. you lose and are a proven liar.." - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 06, @06:45AM (#39907027)
WTF? I said in the same SET OF SENTENCES or SAME PARAGRAPH, in regards to using your favorites (placed @ the TOP of a hosts file) to avoid DNS request log tracking (as well as making you faster by avoiding queries to remote DNS servers that might also be downed, OR, dns poisoned redirected).
There's no "lie" there. It's pure truth... & yes, it works.
---
"5. No, that's not what I'm saying, I'm saying: "it is less exploited than windows is, although they are both a very interesting target and linux's server are targeted at least as much as windows is, per your own reasoning."" - by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May
The "anecdotal evidences" are more than U have, & from 2 security pros
(Whom you also said were "laughing @ me", but the funniest part is? 2 of them AGREE WITH MY IDEAS on custom HOSTS files getting you more speed, more "layered-security"/"defense-in-depth", & even more anonymity to an extent (vs. DNS request logs), + proofing you to redirect-poisoned OR downed DNS servers too (and getting you IP address resolutions FASTER than calling out to a remote DNS server too)).
Those questions are here -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39901099
YOU APPEAR TO BE AFRAID TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS... small wonder why (lol, not).
---
"1. So you get new threat (like my hypothetical malicious website) at the very best as fast as Symantec ? and often later (I suppose you're going to say "only 15 minutes later" ?)" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 08, @02:31PM (#39931343)
Just as fast, I am pretty much "synched" w/ their update cycle @ Norton SafeWeb... & MANY others too, and that's a hell of a lot faster than your "solutions" in antivirus &/or antispyware do, lol... blowing you away, point-by-so-called-point from you? Cake... just too easy.
---
"3. So you admit/say that putting them at the bottom does make it slower." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 08, @02:31PM (#39931343)
Can't you READ?
I don't put my fav. sites hardcoded into my hosts file that way, I do the opposite (can't you READ, moron?) - I nullified your b.s. easily that way... lol!
---
"Conclusion (not an anecdote, simple logic): if people want to occasionally visit non-malicious websites not in their host file, it will be slower for them, unless they previously edit their host file to add this newcomer, which will be insanely slow to do (the edit I mean) especially if they only visit that website only once." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 08, @02:31PM (#39931343)
Stupid - again: CAN'T YOU READ? I place my fav. sites hardcoded into my custom HOSTS file @ the top of it... fast as it can be!
---
"4. So we went through "I didn't say no possible tracking", then "I didn't mean it that way", then "It was in the same sentence as some DNS-related stuff" and finally "it was in the same set of sentences than some DNS-related stuff". I hope by now you do understand the importance of sane phrasing and punctuations ? shorter sentences may help avoid havoc." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 08, @02:31PM (#39931343)
It was in context with DNS tracking logs, no questions asked... you fail as per usual, lol!
---
"5. Oh, come on, on the one hand you say it's 50/50 marketshare in fortune 500 (more like 60/35 overall btw) and on the other hand you say that marketshare reflects how much it gets targeted (your so-called security-through-minority), so per your reasoning, you imply explicitly that they get targeted equally (or linux more than Windows if we take the 60/35 proportions). Of course I don't say it is what happens (I have no idea), but per your own reasoning on security-through-minority, that's what we should see. Right ?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 08, @02:31PM (#39931343)
Fact remains, regardless of your b.s.? Linux servers can and DO GET HACKED - I posted SEVERAL current instances of it that show that much in 2011-2012 !
(Additionally - Very important ones, like the Linux sourcecode repository breached, & others that facilitate secure e-commerce + others (all very bad in 2011-2012)).
Is THAT all you have, vs. those FACTS?
Are you going to call what I put up here in point #5 I alluded to above ->
"Not running at all" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @03:14AM (#39938537)
Bull - you skipped over 1/2 of the questions I asked here -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39901099
Wherever there is a "QUESTION #" or Question mark there? Answer & DISPROVE my points in them (you can't - you blew it in MANY already, lol!)
Ones like "Didn't you say the security community was laughing @ my ideas on hosts files?"
(Funny - I posted 2 security community members' in Mr. Steven Burn (hpHosts/malwarebytes) & Mr. Oliver Day (securityfocus.com/Symantec-Norton) who AGREE with them!)
I also showed PROOF you asked for of MY PROVING SECURITY COMMUNITY PEOPLE WRONG, and they admitted it here -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39862017
(AND, a couple more are coming soon too on that account... lol!)
---
"I did answer your bs question, and blew them away." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @03:14AM (#39938537)
LOL - NO, you didn't, you avoid TONS OF THEM! Doing that alone, as well as MY LITERALLY BLOWING YOU AWAY by your admission on my placement of favs in my hosts file works, and you avoiding the fact that the security community has people in it that agree with me, as just a couple examples, does the rest.
Again - See the link above from my 1st sentence, and next below too...
Did you mean kind of like how you HAD TO ADMIT I BEAT YOUR SO-CALLED "main point" to shit, on indexing being useless when I add my hardcoded favorite websites into my hosts file @ THE TOP OF IT?... lol, some "win" for you (not).
---
"If you want I can answer separately each question" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @03:14AM (#39938537)
Yes, I do!
(As again, you avoided MANY questions in the 1st link above... why's that? We KNOW why... lol!)
U FAIL!
---
"but the answer will be the same for each: This is anecdotal evidence without any statistically significant value" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @03:14AM (#39938537)
First of all - that's FAR MORE THAN YOU HAVE (because all you have is your b.s. vs. MANY OTHERS from this website, and the words of 2 security community people I used).
Secondly - have you ever TRIED a custom hosts file??
IT IS A FACT THAT THEY WORK FOR BETTER:
---
1. ) Speed web surfing (by blocking adbanners alone you see a HUGE speed gain, & hardcoding your fav sites into it alone does a great job for that too)
2.) Better "layered-security'/"defense-in-depth" vs. known bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that serve up malicious script, malware, or are botnet C&C servers, and even bogus DNS servers
3.) Better 'anonymity' vs. tracking on DNS request logs
4.) Better reliability (vs. downed or dns-poisoned/redirected DNS servers)
---
( & more... like operating in Ring 0/RPL 0/kernelmode acting merely as a filter for the TCP/IP stack - unlike say, usermode solutions in AdBlock (which doesn't even BLOCK ALL ADS by default anymore)).
---
"besides you present only the opinions and anecdotes from user that fit your idea, you inappropriately drop any anecdote and opinion that goes against your fantasyland." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @03:14AM (#39938537)
What did YOU present? A lot of b.s. I easily blew away!
(Such as your "point" on indexing in DNS servers you're saying others ought to run... well, I posted a LOAD of their failures in security here earlier -> http://lin
Try Delphi XE2 - you'll love it, almost guaranteed! Like you, I liked Delphi 3/5/7 best in the past too, but now? XE2 can do MacOS X 32/64-bit apps, & the same in Windows too!
(Soon to have Linux as well + .NET of course, but I don't like it other than developing server-side driven stuff, because of garbage cleanup like JAVA has etc./et al).
For "stand-alone" apps that aren't runtime lib interpreted, I am like yourself, & prefer doing statically linked single .exe files.
My latest? This:
A custom hosts file mgt. program that does the following for end users (Calling it "APK Hosts File Engine 5.0++")
---
1.) Offers massively noticeable increased speed for websurfing via blocking adbanners
2.) Offers increased speed for users fav. sites by hardcoding them into the hosts file for faster IP address-to-host/domain name resolutions (which sites RARELY change their hosting providers, e.g.-> of 250 I do, only 6 have changed since 2006 - & when sites do because they found a less costly hosting provider? Then, they either email notify members, put up warnings on their pages, & do IP warnings & redirectors onto the former IP address range to protect vs. the unscrupulous criminal bidding on that range to buy it to steal from users of say, online banking or shopping sites).
3.) Better "Layered-Security"/"Defense-In-Depth" via blocking host-domain based attacks by KNOWN bad sites-servers that are known to do so (which IS, by far, the majority of what's used by both users (hence the existence of the faulty but for most part working DNS system), AND even by malware makers (since host-domain names are recyclable by they, & the RBN (Russian Business Network & others)) were doing it like mad with "less than scrupulous", or uncaring, hosting providers)
4.) Better 'anonymity' to an extent vs. DNS request logs (not vs. DPI ("deep packet inspection"))
5.) The ability to circumvent unjust DNSBL (DNS Block Lists) if unjust or inconveniences a user.
6.) Protection vs. online trackers
7.) Better security vs. the DNS system being "dns poisoned/redirected" (a known problem for recursive DNS servers via port 51/53 misdirection)
8.) Write protecting the hosts file every 1/2 second (supplementing UAC) - even if/when you move it from the default location via this registry entry (which if done, can function ALMOST like *NIX shadow passwords because of this program):
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\services\Tcpip\Parameters
And changing the "DataBasePath" parameter there (I do this moving it to a faster media, a "true SSD" using DDR-2 RAM, in the 4gb Gigabyte IRAM I have).
9.) Automatic downloading & Alphabetic sorting of hosts files' records entries (for easier end user mgt. manually) from 15 reliable sources (of 17 I actually use).
10.) Manual editing of all files used (hosts to import list, hosts itself in its default location of %windir%\system32\drivers\etc, the hosts files to import/download & process, & favorite sites to reverse dns ping to avoid DNS (noted above why)).
11.) Removal scanners (if the users decide to remove hosts entries from imported data they can check if the site is indeed known as bad or not (sometimes 'false positives' happen, or just bad entries, or sites clean themselves up after infestation due to vulnerable coding etc./et al)).
12.) Removal of bloating material in many hosts files like Comments (useless bulk in a hosts file that's "all business")
13.) Removal of bloating material in many hosts files like Trailing comments after records (produces duplicates)
14.) Removal of bloating material in many hosts files like Invalid TLD entries (program checks this in a BETTER method than the API call "PathIsURL")
15.) Removal of bloating material in many hosts files like Trims entries (vs. trailing blanks bloat on record entries)
16.) Removal of bloating material in many hosts files like the
Take over in business offices? Then, you'll have a point. Until then?? Keep eatin' ur words -> -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2808773&cid=39855971 - flavored w/ the bitter taste of defeat n ur foot in ur mouth!
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2808773&cid=39855971 - flavored w/ the bitter taste of defeat n ur foot in ur mouth? Absolutely - LOL!
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2808773&cid=39855971 - flavored w/ the bitter taste of defeat n ur foot in ur mouth? Absolutely, no questions asked - LOL!
Havin 2 eat ur words -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2808773&cid=39855971 flavored w/ the bitter taste of defeat n ur foot in ur mouth? Absolutely, no questions asked - LOL! Not that YOU ever HAD the respect of anyone here on /., but there you are... how do they taste?? LMAO @ U, troll...
Didn't you say the security community was laughing @ my ideas on hosts files?
yes I did, you were banned from IT security after all and you're a well known meme on the internet (some call you "the spam hostfile"). e-mail from two individuals showing that you were removed from their malware list is nothing close to "I proved them wrong, security experts suck balls and I'm better than they are". Besides if you had had good stats, you'd know that 2 samples is statistically insignificant in almost every case.
So Question #1: These people are anecdotal evidence, not statistically significant, posted by Anonymous people on the Internet, said people could be you astroturfing, (since anonymous), Question #2: all the same, This one particular expert is not laughing at you in this specific comment that you could have as well forged yourself. 1 expert is anecdotal evidence, statistically insignificant. Question #3: How many times do you want me to repeat the words "anecdotal evidence" exactly ? (8+++ slashdot users, how my, we've gone from 2 samples and 1 sample up to 8+++ samples, that must mean something). Question #4: man 1 sample, you're going down there, btw he should have talk of the "overkillfile" instead, Question #5: ohoh, we're going up to 4 samples now, 8 was better and this is still not statistically significant, anecdotal evidence. Question #6: still the same one expert, dude you're overusing this one, he'll be worn out in no time if you continue. getting away from DNS won't help human rights because nasty dictators just will have to block at IP level. moot argument. Oh and no he's not laughing at you, he doesn't even care who or what you are.
1. So out-of-date it is, you looooose
3. Learn to read: clue: "would". "putting them at the end would make it slower" So if you were to put a website at the end, it would be so slow to get there after your 1.7 millions line to parse. And even worse for any website not in the hostfile, Therefore this proooooves that: "Conclusion (not an anecdote, simple logic): if people want to occasionally visit non-malicious websites not in their host file, it will be slower for them, unless they previously edit their host file to add this newcomer, which will be insanely slow to do (the edit I mean) especially if they only visit that website only once." The key word here is "occasionally", idiot, because it must happen all the time that people visit websites that are not in their favs. I'll make it shorter for you dumbass: "if (not in host file) then {really slow} (reaaaaaally)"
4. So you make a sentence that doesn't have the sense you wanted it to have and it's my fault because I can't spell proooooves ? I'm non-native, so I can make such typos that don't change the meaning, you're supposed to be native and still you cannot express yourself properly. You loooooose (with so many 'o', I can't be wrong, can I ?)
5. And tell us how many are "remote exploits" ? None, since user interaction is required. I'm not mincing words, "remote exploit" has a specific meaning, you're changing it to fit your fantasies.
8. Oh, so now you're qualified to say who is "security expert" and who's not (wannabe) ? I thought you were no security expert, therefore you don't know if they are actual expert of not. They dusted you, deleted your offtopic and erratic rant because it was pointless, non-constructive and idiotic to no end. you're dusted. Period.
"So Question #1: These people are anecdotal evidence, not statistically significant, posted by Anonymous people on the Internet, said people could be you astroturfing, (since anonymous)" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @08:56AM (#39940211)
Ahem: THEY ARE TESTIMONIALS from 2 respected others in the security community!
(Who are FAR from laughing @ me, & instead, AGREE WITH ME)...
That, plus, your own peers here @ /. I listed having successes with hosts files on added speed, added security, added anonymity to an extent, & added reliability do the rest.
There's a DIFFERENCE between 'anecdotal evidence' & actual QUOTED testimonials you can verify (with the people involved, here & in security pros).
In fact, that's also MORE THAN YOU HAVE... lol, & as far as security pros from stackexchange? I showed nothing but ad hominem attacks & deleting my posts that corrected THEIR BLATANTLY ERRONEOUS PRODUCT OF A LACK OF ACTUAL COMP. SCI. UNDERSTANDING ANSWERS!
Period. U FAIL, as per YOUR usual!
---
"yes I did, you were banned from IT security after all and you're a well known meme on the internet (some call you "the spam hostfile")" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @08:56AM (#39940211)
I'm not banned - I can still post there as much as I like, lol... you FAIL badly right off the bat!
---
"e-mail from two individuals showing that you were removed from their malware list is nothing close to "I proved them wrong, security experts suck balls and I'm better than they are". Besides if you had had good stats, you'd know that 2 samples is statistically insignificant in almost every case." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @08:56AM (#39940211)
Those are in fact computer security/antivirus companies I caught in a false positive on a ware I wrote... period!
So what else could I say other than "I AM CLEARLY BETTER THAN THEY ARE" because I had to point out EXACTLY what caused it & how/why/when/where etc. (an exe packer/compressor they were not prepped to handle properly in their antivirus wares... period!).
After all - When "lil' ole' me" has to SHOW the antivirus companies where they go wrong, well... what else could I say as a result??
I had to "school them"... period! Have YOU done the same? NO... lol!
---
"Question #2: all the same, This one particular expert is not laughing at you in this specific comment that you could have as well forged yourself. 1 expert is anecdotal evidence, statistically insignificant." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @08:56AM (#39940211)
2 in both Mr. Oliver Day of Symantec/Norton/SecurityFocus.com AND Mr. Steven Burn of malwarebytes/hpHosts (who also said my latest ware is EXCELLENT mind you).
(That's also certainly MORE TESTIMONIALS than you've produced, windbag troll... lol!)
---
"Question #3: How many times do you want me to repeat the words "anecdotal evidence" exactly ? (8+++ slashdot users, how my, we've gone from 2 samples and 1 sample up to 8+++ samples, that must mean something)." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @08:56AM (#39940211)
Testimonials: Concrete, verfiable testimonials are not mere "anecdotal evidence" & certainly MORE THAN YOU PUT OUT TROLL... lol!
---
"Question #5: ohoh, we're going up to 4 samples now, 8 was better and this is still not statistically significant, anecdotal evidence. " - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @08:56AM (#39940211)
It's certainly BETTER than you have (zero)... lol, no questions asked, & again - testimonials you can verify are NOT mere "anecdotal evidence" (especially from 2 security pros which I used,
a few "testimonials" harvested on the Internet ARE anecdotal evidence. No statistical significance. Period. You're blown apart and you better stop trying to redefine mathematics, you don't have the level to do so.
1. out-of-date, proven facts, it takes host file users days/weeks before they get my (hypothetical) malicious website in their host file. Fact. Period
3. You cannot even think straight when it comes to host file, can you ? Joe-host-file (you) needs to visit once a webiste not in his hostfile. First computer scan the whole bloat (1.7M lines). But unfortunately, nope, it's not not there so after this whole parsing, it has to make a DNS query to one of his favorite filtered DNS server (openDNS, norton DNS, whatever). This double operation (parsing+DNS) is slow, much slower than a simple direct DNS query. Conclusion: "if (not in host file) then {really slow} (reaaaaaally)". This is not anecdotal evidence, it's pure simple college maths: if (small host file) then direct fast DNS query and fast, elseif (bloated host file with 1.7M lines) first check 1.7M lines linearly, then do DNS query). Your host file is only helpful for your favs. not for day-to-day browsing, not for security (remember, it's outdated at release time, malicious website change their name faster (matter of hours/days) than you can get them (matters of days/weeks) in your list, i.e. faster than you can think, if it helps putting a range of values in your head ...)
4. Not a grammar nazi, much worse, a fact straightener: you first spoke nonsense, then lied, then tried to get it straight, then finally got it straight (kinda). you're (so-called) "mistake" changed the meaning a lot, not mine.
5. Oh yes, totally, they are absolutely, definitely, hopefully "remotelly controlable", but they are NOT remote exploits (user interaction required, remember). Now if you find a way to install a trojan without any user interaction, then you'd have a remote exploit, but the remote exploit wouldn't even be the trojan, it would be the mean you used to install it there in the first place. Capito ?
8. And your definition of "quite often" is "one deleted post" ? As far as I'm concerned you're from now on a wannabe security guru and a script kiddy. Try to post with user 9143 then ...
And I guess you failed reading comprehension at elementary school ? I didn't say that you had an obligation to do it I said that if you were to do it you would notice a major slow down even compared to the hostfile-less solution and you all but admitted it. Proving thus by a very simple logical sequitur that any query that must go through the whole host file IS slow and therefore any query for a website not in the host file IS slow (since it has to parse 1st the hostfile then make a DNS query). So your bloated hostfile increases the speed of favs but severly decreases the speed of any other website, especially ones visited only once.
Too bad the comments are soon to be closed on this thread, I'd have kick your troll ass even harder than that. You've lost on every points but some ties, you've shown outstandingly poor writing and reading skills and you've proooooven that you suck at maths, specifically stats. That's a good start in life for a wannabe security guru that think like a script kiddy (not much, that is)
"a few "testimonials" harvested on the Internet ARE anecdotal evidence. No statistical significance. Period. You're blown apart and you better stop trying to redefine mathematics, you don't have the level to do so." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @05:25PM (#39947339)
1st - they're more than YOU had. 2nd - They're from security pros, AND your peers on /. too!
(About they ALL experiencing more speed, better security, better anonymity to an extent vs. DNS request logs + DNSBL's, & better reliability vs. downed or dns-poisoned redirected DNS servers)...
---
"1. out-of-date, proven facts, it takes host file users days/weeks before they get my (hypothetical) malicious website in their host file. Fact. Period" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @05:25PM (#39947339)
Which is FASTER than your originally proposed "solutions" in antispyware/antivirus. on updates (as those don't update every 15 minutes (and I can do it faster IF I wished for hosts file updates, as I wrote the code that does it)).
---
"3. You cannot even think straight when it comes to host file, can you ? Joe-host-file (you) needs to visit once a webiste not in his hostfile. First computer scan the whole bloat (1.7M lines)" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @05:25PM (#39947339)
Ahem: Out of cache fast as is possible, and the same as it would be out of the local DNS clientside cache service
(Except the kernelmode diskcaching subsystem runs in the fastest mode possible as a driver for caching, & iirc, so does SuperFetch in Windows - either does the job!).
So, your point's what?
---
"But unfortunately, nope, it's not not there so after this whole parsing, it has to make a DNS query to one of his favorite filtered DNS server (openDNS, norton DNS, whatever)." - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 09, @05:25PM (#39947339)
Again - this is the SAME DEFAULT BEHAVIOR OF THE IP STACK TO DO THAT, & SEEK ORDER FROM THE LOCAL DNS CLIENTSIDE CACHE SERVICE IN WINDOWS WORKS THE SAME IN THAT CASE TOO!...
My favs are @ the top of it, & all of the hosts' body is in cache memory due to the kernelmode diskcaching subsystem OR superfetch (speed of RAM)...
Again, your point's what here??
Face it - these guys "tell the tale" on THAT much:
"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal
"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ and http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)
"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal
"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for try
Of course they all "agree" with you, you're willingly ignoring all the negative reviews, mods and comment you ever had.
1. out-of-date.
3. My point is the one you don't answer: accessing once to a website not in the 1.7M lines host file is slow as hell, waaaay slower than if your hostfile was only 100-200 lines (or even empty). Measurable fact, not anecdote. if time duration to parse 1.7M lines is T1, time duration to parse 100 lines is T2 and time duration for DNS query is T3, then you get T1+T3 > T2+T3 > T3. T1+T3 is the delay you get, T2+T3 is the delay someone with only is favs get, T3 is what someone with an empty host file gets T2 is close to 0 so T2+T3 is about equal to T3. T1+T3 is not though. you looooooose.
4. So I come back to what you said: "no possible tracking", a pure lie then. Care to explain again where is YOUR typo ?
5. Where do you get that from: "you ADMIT it now even... finally", Why "now" and "finally" ? I've been saying that trojan are remotely exploitable for days (well actually more like forever but you weren't there to listen) see comment 39887251 for instance, I never said they were not "remotely exploitable" (that wouldn't even make sense, it's their purpose in life to be remotely exploitable once installed). All I'm saying and repeating over and over again is that they are not remote exploits (since user interaction is needed). You're either a golden fish (bad memory) or a troll (selective memory). Pick the one you prefer idiot :-). That or you're delusional.
8. I don't see how what I published is important in the matter of you being deleted/banned from IT security ?
"Of course they all "agree" with you, you're willingly ignoring all the negative reviews, mods and comment you ever had." - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10, @04:00AM (#39951469)
I've taken down your "so-called 'points'" point-by-"so-called 'point'" each time via quoting them & disproving them, & on the following below enumerated with source links as PROOF of it, from you:
I disprove "naysayers" on hosts files like I have yourself on the following points in this exchange & YOU?
You have no support for your "so-called 'points'" but I do by the truckload from both security pros, AND your peers here on /. in TESTIMONIALS (written ones, not mere hearsay "anecdotal evidence") they put out here or in articles security pros wrote:
---
1.) DNS servers roundtrip time (slower) vs. resolving hostnames to IP addresses locally from a cached hosts file, which IS FASTER (more on that below too).
2..) DNS servers being full of problems in security (setup in recursive mode & redirect poisoning them via port 51) -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39877131
3.) DNS servers (run locally by the end user) & eating up more CPU cycles, RAM, & other forms of I/O vs. using a custom HOSTS file (merely a filter for the kernelmode PnP designed IP stack) -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39877131
4.) Your stating the security community was laughing @ me (when I showed 2 respected enough security pros doing anything but, & agreeing with me on custom hosts files) -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39877131
5.) I also put out TONS of WRITTEN TESTIMONIALS (not mere "anecdotal evidence") from security pros AND YOUR PEERS HERE ON /. who experienced better speed, security, anonymity to an extent, & reliability hosts files give them -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39888801 where by comparison? You have ZERO to back you... lol!
5.) Showing I have proven the security community wrong before & recently too in 3 major antivirus companies on a false positive -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39862017
6.) Showing I have recently proven erroneous points made by stackexchange (a set of 'security gurus' outta the UK) wrong point-by-erroneous point they made -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39862017
7.) Showing that antivirus/antispyware programs do NOT update as fast vs. known malicious sites as my sources I use do -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39872861 and http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39888801 and here too http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39896273
8.) Showing there is no "bloat" in my custom hosts file (due to a program I've written to remove that in ALL forms possible in hosts files) -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39872861
9.) You stating my host file runs "slowly" but I show completely otherwise using the testimonials of your /. peers here ->
YOU FAIL everytime you write a single word: you keep using statistically irrelevant anecdotal evidence all along
YOU FAIL: you cannot linearly parse 1.7M lines for text search in ns
YOU FAIL: hostfile doesn't protect you against newer threats since outdated as soon as published
YOU FAIL: I'm not twisting your words, "hundreds of people & your /. peers" (do you see the anecdotal evidence here ?) have already told you that your weird writing style and poor phrasing make your sentences barely understandable. You mis-phrased your thoughts, it gave the sentence a completely different meaning. Period
YOU FAIL: try to post with user 9143 (named alexander peter kowalski) on IT security so that we can have a good laugh
YOU FAIL: trojans are not remote exploits, I never said they were not remotely exploited, heck I even said several times that they were of course remotely exploitable and that you were trying to blur the meanings of "remotely exploitable/exploited" and "remote exploit" to fit your fantasies, and here again, you're trying desperately to blur that important difference, once more. Being remotely exploitable doesn't make it a remote exploit, trojans are not remote exploit, I haven't changed my version all the time like you do. Face it, you didn't know what "remote exploit" meant and now you're trying to escape admitting it: if(user interaction needed) then "not a remote exploit".
YOU FAIL: using hostfile doesn't ensure any kind of "better anonymity". "better anonymity" is an non-existent concept, it doesn't even make sense. It does not ensure better reliability either (hey actually this could be useful, if slashdot.org changed their IP address we would get rid of you. Neat.)
Goodbye apk-the-troll, you were dusted, buried, drowned, shown-to-be-a-liar and laughed at for more than one week. And as per your usual yourself, you will answer the same incoherent rant to this post (because you always answer, especially when you've lost, don't you ? Yeah that's the spirit I like in you !). It's weird usually one of your other personality should have shown up by now. You know, the AC answering in one line, trying to sound as if he's not you but using the same weird phrasing and saying stuff like "stop stalking poor apk, he kicked your ass and you should go now" ? Where is he anyway ? I miss him, I tried desperately to trigger him to no end, and still he's nowhere to be seen ...
"YOU FAIL everytime you write a single word: you keep using statistically irrelevant anecdotal evidence all along" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10, @08:52AM (#39952721)
Your list of FAILS (17 of 'em) prove otherwise here -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39952253
---
"YOU FAIL: you cannot linearly parse 1.7M lines for text search in ns" - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 10, @08:52AM (#39952721)
Loading & parsing millions of entries in RAM doesn't take long @ all...
These folks below PROVE it below in fact (see sootman's post)
Plus, I've tested it by loading a record type from a hosts file (C/C++ structure analog in Object Pascal) in fact!
Yes - It takes LESS TIME than calling out to a REMOTE DNS SERVER ROUNDTRIP (30-100's++ of ms & may be DNS poisoned redirected OR DOWNED too) and, I tested with 2++ million entries here, & offered that test, here, to others to try!
HOWEVER - The point?
That is that YOU DO GO FASTER, SAFER, & MORE RELIABLY (vs. poisoned or downed DNS servers) BY BLOCKING ADBANNERS & hardcoding your fav sites & even better for anonymity to an extent vs. DNS request logs, period...
(Additionally - These fellows, your /. peers OFFER WRITTEN TESTIMONIALS TO THAT MUCH as does a security person in Mr. Oliver Day of SecurityFocus.com & BOTH are FAR MORE PROOF to my claims, which are FACT, than your ZERO "anecdotal evidence" from YOU because you have NO BACKING/SUPPORT, period... lol!):
SLASHDOT USERS EXPERIENCING SUCCESS USING HOSTS FILES QUOTED VERBATIM:
---
"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ and http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)
"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal
"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal
"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17, @11:20AM (#38086752) Homepage Journal
"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)
"Better than an ad blocker, imo. Hosts file entries: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm " - by TempestRose (1187397) on Tuesday March 15, @
All anecdotal evidences, statistically insignificant, besides you handily "forget" about all the downmods you had. These outweigh your so-called upmods by 100:1. But hey, let's not destroy your fantasyland.
Who cares about your DNS log when all our traffic is recorded by ISP, idiot ? and again if only Slashdot would change it's IP address we'd get rid of your pompous self-importance.
You fail on all account, even basic logic. That's unbelievable.
Posting days later doesn't hide subject, lol -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39952253 or this too -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2820335&cid=39953685
* Yes, no questions asked? I RULE...
Documented testimonials from security pros (whom you said laugh @ me, yet I show 2 agreeing with me vs. your "hot air" anecdotal b.s., ac troll)
PLUS
NUMEROUS (20++) peers of yours here @ /. as well, agreeing with my points of FACT that hosts files give a user better:
---
A.) "Layered-Security"/"Defense-In-Depth" (vs. known malicious hosts-domains/sites-servers, botnet C&C servers, bogus DNS servers, adbanner servers infested w/ malicious code & more... via hostname blocking which is 99.999% of what you see/use vs. IP addresses and what you get "hit" by most since malicious websites are still the #1 cause of malware infestations etc./et al... IF you see links that are IP address based? A "warning" 'danger will robinson danger' should go off in your head, especially IF you're security conscious...)
B.) Speed and Bandwidth, HUGELY FASTER (try around 200-300% increase) for their money they pay out (vs. adbanners slowing them down & blocking them out, + hardcoding favs)
C.) Anonymity to an extent, vs. DNS request logs via hardcoded favorites...
D.) Reliability vs. "DNS-poisoned"-redirected OR "downed" DNS servers via hardcoded favorites...
E.) Bypass of unjust DNSBL's (via hardcoded favorites)
F.) More "screen real estate" by adbanners not eating them up.
G.) Faster/Lower Level more universal protection for ANY "webbound app" via custom hosts files operating @ Ring 0/RPL 0/KernelMode of operations, merely being a filter for the IP stack.
H.) Less work than maintaining a recursive (security risk via port 51/53) or otherwise DNS server, eating less CPU cycles, RAM, + other forms of I/O and electricity as well (even if local program + service only, & moreso if another system doing the job)...
---
... and MUCH more...
That?
THAT does NOT equal fail vs. yourself... it equals EASY victory for me, hands-down, no doubt about it...
(Just by using facts & know-how as is per my usual vs. your cowardly ac stalk/troll/harass tactics & technical inadequacy in the art & science of computing... concepts QUITE beyond your ken, obviously... lol!)
* All in all, it has been a a PLEASURE "technically annihilating" you... with ease, on many points in the links above.
APK
P.S.=> Listen, face it: You wish you were me, lol, & I just MUST thank-you, for making ME look GOOD, as-is-per-your-"EPIC FAIL"-usual, vs. myself, w/ you posting as AC only to be annihilated & dismantled, per the above links + facts, lol... yes, You KNOW I've just gotta say it, as-is-per-my-inimitable-style:
This? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2EZ'" vs. truly COWARDLY ac trolls that tried on b-tree seeks and failed vs. myself on hosts files fav.'s hardcoded as his "big fail" here, making my favs./bookmarks in fact!
... apk, hands-down, no doubt about it...
(Just by using facts /b
Someone commented before me that the opportunity for Linux on the desktop existed when other OS (Windows 95-98) were the only alternatives, etc., and that this opportunity was missed. I submit that if the same opportunity shows up today, say Microsoft goes bankrupt and a mysterious virus leaves all Windows OS irreparably inoperable right now, Linux on the desktop won't succeed either, 20 years later. In my opinion, the reason is a fundamental cultural difference with commercial alternatives. Commercial products/companies put (or at least try to put) the usability, the comfort of the user as a top priority. On the other hand, the Open Source culture, of which Linux is part, puts at the top of the priority stack the developer, programmer, freedom, choice, etc. Usability, the user, is secondary. You got to be nice to the developer, the new CS graduate, your colleague at your nonprofit org, etc. You have to provide lots of choices, lots of configurations, etc. For the average user, and for many advanced users (like me), what is important is a system that is easy to use and maintain. I don't really care for the many choices and freedoms that I don't use. And they bug me if I have to learn them to actually exercise my sacrosanct right to make the choice. That takes time, and I have to get my job done. Endlessly learning and re-learning what has changed since the last release, and which didn't have to change in the first place because all was working alright before, is at the bottom of my preferences. Thus, the new graduate from the CS MS program invented a super-duper new GNOME desktop, convinced others about its greatness and made GNOME 3 the standard desktop of the 'cutting edge' distro Fedora 16. Sooooo, I either have to spend days or weeks learning the 'new ways' of doing the same things that I am used to do, and unlearn what became the common way of navigating my applications, menus, filesystem, etc. to use the greatest-and-latest CS MS production. Sorry: I don't have time to help you developer/MS CS student/graduate: I need to have my work done: I will use something else instead, something I am familiar with. For now I switched to KDE on Fedora, but it also suffers from some of the same 'greatest-and-latest' syndromes. Windows seems a better option: things keep working there more or less the way I am familiar with. It is also more stable than ever and the fonts of the desktop don't suck. Actully I am writing this on a Windoze machine. I would have preferred not to. But the Open Source culture forces me. By the way, according to what I read on the web, users have run away from GNOME 3 and from Fedora as a result, in mass. No, you can't force hundreds of users to learn your stuff. I am happy you got your degree. Just don't make pay for it. I understand your heart, Open Source developers. I am a software developer too, with a few decades of experience in that. But I am also a user. I need to get my work done. Some more user-friendly distros (Ubuntu, to name one that I use) try to mitigate all this. But there is little they can do: mitigation is against the culture: can't succeed, I think. Yet Ubuntu keeps it more usable. I can continue with this, as I have followed the history and evolution of Linux since nearly the beginnings (my first desktop was RedHat 2 or something like that) but whoever wants to, can get the picture of what I am trying to say. All the symptoms described in the article and the comments are just the symptoms. If we want to cure a disease, you attack the source, the bacteria, virus, etc., not just the headache. Is the cultural disease of Linux curable?. I am not optimistic. It is a culture, after all.