yes, actually. They are pointing out that there is a potential for a security hole LONG before anyone knows how to exploit it for anything. Do you think Microsoft releases security bulletins for things only it knows about, which have no known exploits? No, they don't. They just roll the fixes into the next service pack.
"Only true if you define "widely known" to mean "we issued an advisory"."
No, it's true if you define "widely known" as _someone_ issuing an advisory. The same is true for Windows. Most of the security problems that they release advisories for, are ONLY those which external organizations have contacted them about, and are planning to go public with.
So, although I think there are problems with both systems, I think the Linux one is much more open and honest (though not completely), and is more likely to warn you before there are problems, rather than after.
One thing to notice is the number of security warnings issued for Linux systems where the problem is a race condition that has to be exploited by someone being logged on the machine performing split-second operations on temp files. Such a scenario would mean that it would not make it on Microsoft's advisory list, while Linux people find it very serious.
I understand how you misunderstood me. My point was that under Linux, you can backport fixes to whatever version you are running, but on Windows, you have to upgrade to the latest version. I did not intend to mean that you had to upgrade all of your applications, just that you had to upgrade all of whatever application had the advisory - thus the problem of there not being support for old versions, you have to upgrade the whole thing or nothing. With Linux, you can backport fixes, which the distributions (both community and commercial-based) do quite well.
The patents are on the pantone color system, which is not very useful. CMYK itself is, I believe, patent free. Someone did write a CMYK exporter, and CMYK should have full support in the next release.
Does IIS 4 run on Windows 2003? Nope, have to migrate. There are many tools that fall into this category, not to mention the operating system configuration itself.
"At work, we've had more problems with Linux x.x, Apache, and Oracle 9i playing nicely than problems with varying flavors of Windows."
Again, you are mixing in a closed-source component. Thus, it _is_ hard to work around problems. Using Postgres it is pretty easy.
In fact, I even made a patch to Postgres to make it match our company's workflow. It took me all of 2.5 hours, and I wasn't even familiar with the Postgres code base. It will be included in 7.5 I believe, but it cleanly patches to releases before that. If you're curious, it's at http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/pgdump-cvs-patch.di ff
If I wanted to do something similar with Oracle or SQL Server, I imagine the response would be along the lines of "Go take a hike".
"My employee does not pay me to learn new things."
That's really sad. You know, the difference between your slowest and fastest employees are about between 4x and 10x, at least in programming. Some of that difference is accounted to by talent, but a lot of it comes from self-directed study. Where I work, everyone spends about an hour a day learning something new, even if it is only tangentially related to what we do in our jobs. Consequently, our company has been one of the only tech companies that has been growing in our area. And it's not just the programmers - our designers, our PR people, and our sales people all take time, COMPANY time, to sharpen their skills.
Because of this, we have one of the most productive companies I've ever worked in. We are able to handle quite a big load, because we all know the _best_ ways of handling each job.
If you can double your productivity (which is fairly easy to do by this method), spending an hour a day is a minor investment.
Also note that this is not a highly capitalized operation. The company started off as 3 people who invested by charging their credit cards to the limit. Because we are able to do things so well, so fast, and so good, and for so little, we are increasing our sales in a down economy.
I guess we'll just have to disagree. I think that, in comparison, Linux advisories tend to be much better. The fixes are even better because i can tell before applying exactly what the impact will be, and whether or not the fix actually fixes the underlying problem or just a symptom.
Do you really think that Microsoft publishes security advisories for kernel problems that others don't point out and make public? The one you referenced was specifically referencing a third party which notified them. The Linux community also issues advisories for widely-known kernel issues as well.
"You people Ignore (with capital I) what the end users want. You are so caught up with being different, revolutionary and 3133t that you want to revise everything."
Who is "you people"?
You're saying you don't want usability improvements? That you wouldn't spend 4 hours learning something that would save you that in 2 weeks of usage?
Just because you fall into this mysterious category of "the end user" doesn't mean everyone does. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that other people won't.
My wife loves Linux - she loves the way that Mozilla and the GIMP handle - you know, the "new" way. She's not a geek. She had only run MS Windows beforehand. So, don't speak for everyone. Speak for yourself if _you_ don't like the interface, and I'm sure some will agree with you. However, neither you nor me speak for the end-user population in general.
It's this diversity that makes the world great. However, lambasting people because they like something different than you do or have different priorities than you do is silly.
That's exactly what Wine is. The wine project consists of Linux libraries that reimplement Win32, plus a program that allows loading and executing COFF binaries (same function as ld-linux.so).
"WHY THE FUCK does Gimp have all of its image processing functions in a goddamn right-mousebutton pop-up menu"
So they are easier to get to. In addition, the fact that it is multiple windows allows you to make better use of the screen. I love the GIMP design, and even prefer it on Windows because I hate the Photoshop "take-over-your-screen" approach. Interestingly, the only reason they did that was because they needed a fast kludge to get their MacOS product working on Windows. There are 2 reasons people like Adobe's interface:
1) They are used to it. Most people, once they actually learn GIMP's interface, like it better.
2) It has custom-designed toolchests. Every toolbox in Photoshop _looks_ like it was designed by an artist, and not just stock toolkit buttons. This doesn't make it more functional, but does add appeal to those who are artistically minded.
"And what does clustering technologies like OpenMosix have to do with running an application that is intended for usage on workstations, not render farms?"
Actually, OpenMosix is built specifically for applications not intended to run on render farms. Unlike other clusters, you just use the regular UNIX API for OpenMosix. So, programming for a cluster is the same as for a multiprocessor single machine (i.e. - a big workstation).
Photoshop is mostly running the filters, which is doesn't use the OS anyway, so it shouldn't be much of an issue. Perhaps in large graphics, when it has to use it's temporary file (I wonder if it would get better performance in Linux just using VM?)
"The GIMP is nothing compared to photoshop. It may work for amateurs, but even people who use it as a major hobby could not get the same results with GIMP."
I know many people who use the GIMP for great results. I personally use it for menus for VCDs quite a bit, as well as web graphics. Perhaps you are simply not aware of all of it's features?
In scriptability, when we have a large site to build, we define standard button types, and I make scripts to generate them, and then we just do them in batch, and then as-needed. These are complicated buttons/headings that Photoshop actions don't do well enough for. But with GIMP, it's easy.
There is one place that GIMP falls flat - print. The lack of CMYK really hurts it for print. Other than that, I can't think of anything really missing from it. Well, maybe PS has better dynamic text support, but that's usually not too big of an issue (GIMP's is definitely good enough).
Wine is not an emulator. It is a Win32 API implementation. Just like KDE is a toolkit implementation, and so is GNOME. There is nothing less Linux-ish about Win32 than GNOME or KDE, other than the API was written by masochists (probably the same people who named the system call creat).
"Support? What support is needed? Build the system, install it, and run your application on top of it. If a huge hole crops up years later, after MS cuts off 'support' for it, you have the option. Ignore it, or upgrade. Same as with Linux. "
Wrong. With Windows, you have to upgrade EVERYTHING to the latest release. That means migrating software configurations, and modifying everything to use whatever the latest standard is. With Linux, you have the source, so you can just fix the problem itself, and keep going. This is a huge difference.
"And, just as with Linux...MS is not the sole point of 'support'."
Yes they are. They are the sole point of _complete_ support. Ultimately, HP and Dell and even IBM have to depend on Microsoft for authoritative technical information and patches. Linux people can just use the source.
As for the newsgroups, I know they exist for both, but, at least IMHO, the ones for Linux are much better.
"IMHO, it's getting more and more likely that Microsoft crushes the free software competition in the security area"
Doubtful, since they are losing ground in every other area (I'm not saying they are behind, but they are losing their headstart).
"because of more reliable software, better product management, courage to make decisions which inconvenience users etc."
The interesting thing is that the reason people bought from Microsoft, is that Microsoft sold them on the fantasy notion that system administration could be made to be an easy task handled by dummies. With that mentality, they started losing when everyone woke up and smelled the enterprise. With their new mentality, everyone will say, "so why should we bother with Microsoft when we can go a more open and cheaper route?"
"Right now, their advisories are already among the best the market offers"
I like the idea of an open-source foundation, where you can pay to the general fund for the ever-building-up of open-source software, or you can sponsor projects that would benefit your company.
We kind of already have it w/ GNU, although they've been focusing more on legal issues and advocacy lately.
Previously, Novell had an excellent product - their directory services. In addition, it would run on more Microsoft operating systems than NT. For example, you could authenticate and use Novell resources from DOS, not so with NT, at least not without a LOT of help. Novell is the product everyone wanted to use, because it made your life easier, it's just that noone wanted to run their operating system.
Now they have a chance to go in with the operating system that EVERYONE is wanting to run (a lot of people _want_ to run Linux, but are unable to do so because of their Windows machines). Novell is the king of getting their software to play nicely with Windows. I can see Novell going into Linux, and then being able to replace Active Directory with the click of a button.
And this purchase means that their server will be incredibly easy-to-use.
Slashdot Mirror
"but only if it can be accepted that GIMP is not (yet?) all things to all people"
I think people already accept that. I really didn't see many posts at all defending GIMP for print work.
"and that philosophy must sometimes take a back seat to pragmatism"
Whether or not X is pragmatic depends entirely on one's philosophy.
"Quite helpful, eh?"
yes, actually. They are pointing out that there is a potential for a security hole LONG before anyone knows how to exploit it for anything. Do you think Microsoft releases security bulletins for things only it knows about, which have no known exploits? No, they don't. They just roll the fixes into the next service pack.
"Only true if you define "widely known" to mean "we issued an advisory"."
No, it's true if you define "widely known" as _someone_ issuing an advisory. The same is true for Windows. Most of the security problems that they release advisories for, are ONLY those which external organizations have contacted them about, and are planning to go public with.
So, although I think there are problems with both systems, I think the Linux one is much more open and honest (though not completely), and is more likely to warn you before there are problems, rather than after.
One thing to notice is the number of security warnings issued for Linux systems where the problem is a race condition that has to be exploited by someone being logged on the machine performing split-second operations on temp files. Such a scenario would mean that it would not make it on Microsoft's advisory list, while Linux people find it very serious.
I understand how you misunderstood me. My point was that under Linux, you can backport fixes to whatever version you are running, but on Windows, you have to upgrade to the latest version. I did not intend to mean that you had to upgrade all of your applications, just that you had to upgrade all of whatever application had the advisory - thus the problem of there not being support for old versions, you have to upgrade the whole thing or nothing. With Linux, you can backport fixes, which the distributions (both community and commercial-based) do quite well.
The patents are on the pantone color system, which is not very useful. CMYK itself is, I believe, patent free. Someone did write a CMYK exporter, and CMYK should have full support in the next release.
Does IIS 4 run on Windows 2003? Nope, have to migrate. There are many tools that fall into this category, not to mention the operating system configuration itself.
i ff
"At work, we've had more problems with Linux x.x, Apache, and Oracle 9i playing nicely than problems with varying flavors of Windows."
Again, you are mixing in a closed-source component. Thus, it _is_ hard to work around problems. Using Postgres it is pretty easy.
In fact, I even made a patch to Postgres to make it match our company's workflow. It took me all of 2.5 hours, and I wasn't even familiar with the Postgres code base. It will be included in 7.5 I believe, but it cleanly patches to releases before that. If you're curious, it's at http://www.eskimo.com/~johnnyb/pgdump-cvs-patch.d
If I wanted to do something similar with Oracle or SQL Server, I imagine the response would be along the lines of "Go take a hike".
"My employee does not pay me to learn new things."
That's really sad. You know, the difference between your slowest and fastest employees are about between 4x and 10x, at least in programming. Some of that difference is accounted to by talent, but a lot of it comes from self-directed study. Where I work, everyone spends about an hour a day learning something new, even if it is only tangentially related to what we do in our jobs. Consequently, our company has been one of the only tech companies that has been growing in our area. And it's not just the programmers - our designers, our PR people, and our sales people all take time, COMPANY time, to sharpen their skills.
Because of this, we have one of the most productive companies I've ever worked in. We are able to handle quite a big load, because we all know the _best_ ways of handling each job.
If you can double your productivity (which is fairly easy to do by this method), spending an hour a day is a minor investment.
Also note that this is not a highly capitalized operation. The company started off as 3 people who invested by charging their credit cards to the limit. Because we are able to do things so well, so fast, and so good, and for so little, we are increasing our sales in a down economy.
Ahhh, it probably has problems opening up Photoshop layers. I always create in GIMP, so I don't have PS compatibility problems.
I guess we'll just have to disagree. I think that, in comparison, Linux advisories tend to be much better. The fixes are even better because i can tell before applying exactly what the impact will be, and whether or not the fix actually fixes the underlying problem or just a symptom.
Do you really think that Microsoft publishes security advisories for kernel problems that others don't point out and make public? The one you referenced was specifically referencing a third party which notified them. The Linux community also issues advisories for widely-known kernel issues as well.
"You people Ignore (with capital I) what the end users want. You are so caught up with being different, revolutionary and 3133t that you want to revise everything."
Who is "you people"?
You're saying you don't want usability improvements? That you wouldn't spend 4 hours learning something that would save you that in 2 weeks of usage?
Just because you fall into this mysterious category of "the end user" doesn't mean everyone does. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that other people won't.
My wife loves Linux - she loves the way that Mozilla and the GIMP handle - you know, the "new" way. She's not a geek. She had only run MS Windows beforehand. So, don't speak for everyone. Speak for yourself if _you_ don't like the interface, and I'm sure some will agree with you. However, neither you nor me speak for the end-user population in general.
It's this diversity that makes the world great. However, lambasting people because they like something different than you do or have different priorities than you do is silly.
I haven't seen a Windows kernel advisory, either. Alan Cox won't reveal anything about kernel security out of fear of the DMCA.
Most of the published insecurities with either system are in the libraries or applications, not the kernel.
That's exactly what Wine is. The wine project consists of Linux libraries that reimplement Win32, plus a program that allows loading and executing COFF binaries (same function as ld-linux.so).
"WHY THE FUCK does Gimp have all of its image processing functions in a goddamn right-mousebutton pop-up menu"
So they are easier to get to. In addition, the fact that it is multiple windows allows you to make better use of the screen. I love the GIMP design, and even prefer it on Windows because I hate the Photoshop "take-over-your-screen" approach. Interestingly, the only reason they did that was because they needed a fast kludge to get their MacOS product working on Windows. There are 2 reasons people like Adobe's interface:
1) They are used to it. Most people, once they actually learn GIMP's interface, like it better.
2) It has custom-designed toolchests. Every toolbox in Photoshop _looks_ like it was designed by an artist, and not just stock toolkit buttons. This doesn't make it more functional, but does add appeal to those who are artistically minded.
" Have you tried opening a photoshop document with tons of layers in The Gimp ?"
How many do you consider "tons"? It regularly handles 20 for me just fine.
This is true only as much as NT is an emulator for Win32 (especially since NT was originally built to be a text-only OS).
"And what does clustering technologies like OpenMosix have to do with running an application that is intended for usage on workstations, not render farms?"
Actually, OpenMosix is built specifically for applications not intended to run on render farms. Unlike other clusters, you just use the regular UNIX API for OpenMosix. So, programming for a cluster is the same as for a multiprocessor single machine (i.e. - a big workstation).
Photoshop is mostly running the filters, which is doesn't use the OS anyway, so it shouldn't be much of an issue. Perhaps in large graphics, when it has to use it's temporary file (I wonder if it would get better performance in Linux just using VM?)
" is essentially about 20% of Photoshop at best."
Based on what? Examples? Yes, everyone knows that GIMP can't do CMYK. But for web graphics, what is the difference?
"The GIMP is nothing compared to photoshop. It may work for amateurs, but even people who use it as a major hobby could not get the same results with GIMP."
I know many people who use the GIMP for great results. I personally use it for menus for VCDs quite a bit, as well as web graphics. Perhaps you are simply not aware of all of it's features?
In scriptability, when we have a large site to build, we define standard button types, and I make scripts to generate them, and then we just do them in batch, and then as-needed. These are complicated buttons/headings that Photoshop actions don't do well enough for. But with GIMP, it's easy.
There is one place that GIMP falls flat - print. The lack of CMYK really hurts it for print. Other than that, I can't think of anything really missing from it. Well, maybe PS has better dynamic text support, but that's usually not too big of an issue (GIMP's is definitely good enough).
'a Windows API (which is one of the definitions of "emulator") '
Not really. Only as far as Windows NT is an emulator. Wine is just another Linux API, like GNOME or KDE.
The had to do major contortions to get it to work in a sane environment like Linux, but probably no more than MS had to do to get it to run on NT.
Wine is not an emulator. It is a Win32 API implementation. Just like KDE is a toolkit implementation, and so is GNOME. There is nothing less Linux-ish about Win32 than GNOME or KDE, other than the API was written by masochists (probably the same people who named the system call creat).
"Support? What support is needed? Build the system, install it, and run your application on top of it. If a huge hole crops up years later, after MS cuts off 'support' for it, you have the option. Ignore it, or upgrade. Same as with Linux. "
Wrong. With Windows, you have to upgrade EVERYTHING to the latest release. That means migrating software configurations, and modifying everything to use whatever the latest standard is. With Linux, you have the source, so you can just fix the problem itself, and keep going. This is a huge difference.
"And, just as with Linux...MS is not the sole point of 'support'."
Yes they are. They are the sole point of _complete_ support. Ultimately, HP and Dell and even IBM have to depend on Microsoft for authoritative technical information and patches. Linux people can just use the source.
As for the newsgroups, I know they exist for both, but, at least IMHO, the ones for Linux are much better.
"IMHO, it's getting more and more likely that Microsoft crushes the free software competition in the security area"
Doubtful, since they are losing ground in every other area (I'm not saying they are behind, but they are losing their headstart).
"because of more reliable software, better product management, courage to make decisions which inconvenience users etc."
The interesting thing is that the reason people bought from Microsoft, is that Microsoft sold them on the fantasy notion that system administration could be made to be an easy task handled by dummies. With that mentality, they started losing when everyone woke up and smelled the enterprise. With their new mentality, everyone will say, "so why should we bother with Microsoft when we can go a more open and cheaper route?"
"Right now, their advisories are already among the best the market offers"
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!
Admittedly, my wording was confusing, but I was referring to the client software.
Novell client runs on just about everything. They have better support for old MS operating systems as a _client_ than NT does.
I like the idea of an open-source foundation, where you can pay to the general fund for the ever-building-up of open-source software, or you can sponsor projects that would benefit your company.
We kind of already have it w/ GNU, although they've been focusing more on legal issues and advocacy lately.
Previously, Novell had an excellent product - their directory services. In addition, it would run on more Microsoft operating systems than NT. For example, you could authenticate and use Novell resources from DOS, not so with NT, at least not without a LOT of help. Novell is the product everyone wanted to use, because it made your life easier, it's just that noone wanted to run their operating system.
Now they have a chance to go in with the operating system that EVERYONE is wanting to run (a lot of people _want_ to run Linux, but are unable to do so because of their Windows machines). Novell is the king of getting their software to play nicely with Windows. I can see Novell going into Linux, and then being able to replace Active Directory with the click of a button.
And this purchase means that their server will be incredibly easy-to-use.