GNU/Linux is inherently more secure than Windows. Not least because GNU/Linux is a derivative of UNIX, which was designed from the bottom up to be a multi-user system. Permission-based security is a cornerstone feature of GNU/Linux, whereas Windows (being derived from DOS) can't implement a proper multi-user model for the sake of backward compatability.
Please tell me you don't seriously believe that IBM has any moral or ethical interest in 'your' cause.
They are here to make money. Their last attempt at a competing operating system failed to dent the market in any way shape or form, so now, in their never-ending effort to take lead of the market, they're backing the nearest runner behind Microsoft, which happens to be open source.
Ah! Thank you SO much for letting us know why people use Windows.
If by 'people' he meant 'anyone who knows enough about both technologies to have an opinion' (ie., most people here) he'd be right. Most people (including myself) who use Windows by choice are in the same boat.
I can use Linux, I prefer the way it does certain things over the way Windows does them (such as the relatively stronger multi-user design, the stricter FHS, the nature of distribution, and so on and so forth). But sorry, all that counts for dick if I've got to fight with the fucking thing to do something as simple as dragging & dropping a file or cutting and pasting, while sacraficing other 'basic' UI elements & concepts that Windows users can take for granted. And don't even get me started on Xfree86.
So bundling, marketing and strong-arming have nothing to do with it?
No. Why should I give a shit?
What you're saying is, if Linux tomorrow had an EVEN TIGHTER interface, everyone would switch?
Yes, although owing to the nature of 'open source' in general, I wouldn't bank on seeing that happen this side of 2006. If at all.
There are few things funnier on slashdot than seeing the moderators jump all over a geniunely informative and non-offensive comment just because it happens to mention that Microsoft implemented a feature ages ago that is new in the linux kernel now.
Overrated! NO, Flamebait! NO, Troll! JUST MAKE HIM SHUT UP BEFORE ANYONE SEES IT, QUICK!
That was the fault of the technology at the time, not DOS. Regardless, what you're on about there has nothing to do with the dos 'package management' system.
I'm glad you're amused, although at this point i'm obliged to refer you a physician regarding that attention-deficit disorder you seem to be displaying.
The really LOL part is that you continue to contradict yourself in each post and you don't look as though you even know it! Although I should probably feel bad laughing, after all, it isn't your fault.
I'm going to bed now, in the mean time I'd recommend you busy yourself with some colouring books or anything else that doesn't involve consuming sugar. If you find yourself getting overstimulated by what you read, take a break and count to ten. I'll be back in the morning.
You have pledged your allegience to Microsoft so in effect you have already pledged your allegience to satan.
LOLL0RZ BCUZ M!CRO$HAFT R EVIL AM I RITE GUYS???? RITE????
Apparently not only do you not have morals but you also can't read. I said nothing about capitalism or the evils thereof.
Well gosh darn shoot if that isn't just me giving people the benefit of the doubt again. See, the mistake I made there was that I assume that:
I am disgusted that you feel that you need to add your voice to the din raised by marketing companies, PR firms, paid for politicians, bought out analysts.
was actually you commenting on the state of american business, and not just re-gurgitating the same old tired spiel that you heard some bigger boys use without actually taking the time to think about what it meant first. My bad!
See, politicians getting paid off is part of every day business in America. Money buys the laws that keep these monopolies in the position they're in - money that goes to line the pockets of politicians to pay for their advertising campaigns to keep them in power! Money, advertising, greed, power! Tell me all that filth doesn't make your pecker just a little bit hard! You're starting to agree with me now, aren't you?
But resist! I know, pull out "your" my standards for myself are very low defense. Rephrased, it goes something like this:
Gee mommy, I didn't kill the neigbours dog, but then johnny went ahead and did it anyway, and now I can't do shit because Microsoft have a monopoly over the industry!
Tough shit, junior. That's the way it is. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the rich buy laws to make sure it stays that way. That's capitalism.
I am honestly curious though. Why did you pledge your allegience to MS? Why not Honda? They make nice stuff. Why not ghirardelli? They make tasty choclate. Why did you choose MS over all the other corporations in the world.
Honestly? Just because it pisses you off. That's about the only reason, really. You should be flattered!
Check again. or, link to something on a webserver you can see the logs to, and note that 80% of the user agent strings that hit that link are from one version of Windows or another. Slashdot is actually only marginally 'better' than the rest of the web as far as open source readers go.
You sound like a retard, that's what's 'what.' The original poster made a lot of excellent and valid point. Then you come along, tell him that bash MS because you can, go off on a tangental tirade about the evils of capitalism, and get modded up for it.
Stop me if I'm wrong here, but I thought the tagline says 'News for NERDS.' Now, unless I missed the memo the queen sent out this morning that changed the meaning of the word 'nerd' to be synonymous with the word 'moron,' I'd say that Microsoft have a rather large part to play in that role. So, enter people such as yourself stage left, who are just going to bash them continually, blisfully ignorant of all the technology in question, simply because they're the biggest player in the field. And god help anyone who tries to reason otherwise, they're clearly leftist pinku commy faggots.
Christ, I'd swear allegience to satan if I knew you were batting for the other team. You are what is wrong with slashdot. Congratulations.
Re:This piece of crap crashes on Windws for no rea
on
Gimp Hits 2.0
·
· Score: 0
Imagine how damaging this could be if the intruders got the source code! Now Microsoft can view our source!
Don't worry, it's worthless anyway
Re:This piece of crap crashes on Windws for no rea
on
Gimp Hits 2.0
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
[i]Yeah, Windows has that tendency.[/i]
But . . it doesn't.
How is that funny? Is it funny because it might have been a valid comment 4 or 5 years ago? LOL LINUX LOSERS HOW'S THAT USB SUPPORT WORKING OUT FOR YOU? LOL +5 FUNNY!
Oh wait no, sorry. I get it! It must be funny because you're too retarded to set Windows up properly. You should be able to do that! Windows is for morons! lol +5 funny!
What makes you think Google wouldn't do the same thing if they thought they could get away with it? What makes you think they haven't been, and they have been getting away with it?
If anything, they're more likely to. You obviously hate MS (HURRRR M!CRO$HAFT) so much, what makes you think they won't play it straight with their search engine just to steal those few extra users from Google who're concerned about such things? Don't forget, Microsoft doesn't need the income, unlike Google.
More anti-Microsoft rhetoric. You'd think that MS bashing would be too mainstream to bother with these days.
Looks like a M$ fanboy losing his temper or being paid to look like they are. Tut, tut.
Don't flatter yourself.
With free software all hardware is controled by the kernel running as root.
How is this different to Winodows, Dumbass? Go on, name ONE piece of hardware on a standard Windows desktop that is driven from userspace. There aren't any, because in your fantastical world of free software wonderfulness and Microsoft villiany, you're forgetting the basic fucking principles of computer science i.e., what a 'kernel' is and does.
Tell me, do you actually know ANYTHING about the way Windows is 'designed', or anything about good design at all for that matter? From the rest of your piss-poor arguments you could probably just guess you don't, but in this case I don't even need to do that, and this is why:
I've just written a mail client that opens attachments automatcally, runs, activex and javascripts without even prompting the user, and displays new messages as they are downloaded without asking either. I published it under the GPL, therefore it is free software. LOL not so safe now, are you? But wait! You're now going to tell me how you wouldn't run my mail reader in a million years because you only run quality software. Of course, I COULD actually use the same argument, or I could just state the fact that by default, microsoft outlook runs in restricted sites zone and will not allow the user to parse any harmful user attachments without specific re-configuration first. OH NO! FACTS! QUICK! DON'T LISTEN! MICROSOFT ARE EVIL AND FUCK BABIES! LALALALALALA!
My OS does not have files that I can't see or erase, so clean up is much easier to.
I am actually interested in what you meant with this little nugget of grammatic gold. In the rest of your post, you argue the merits of an operating system that the user can't fuck up even if they tried. Surely files you can't erase or even see would be nothing but beneficial to this argument? Either way, you're wrong, because contrary to your paranoid believe there are no such files in Windows.
Then again, you have no idea what software I'm running
Yes! Just out of interest, boys and girls, this is one of the many reasons why free software will never hit the bigtime on desktop machines.
Worse for Billy boy, the number of holes in free software is low due to PEER REVIEW.
Just because its open source doesn't mean anyone is going to read it. This is why people uncover kernel exploits in 2.6 and trace the code waaay back to early in the 2.4 tree where it was introduced MONTHS ago. Why weren't they spotted as soon as the code was released? If that particular developer got of of bed on the wrong side that morning would the flaw have been spotted at all? This, of course, makes you wonder. Then dismiss your argument as being retarded trash.
A Linux, Solaris, OSX or BSD user has to try very hard to make their computer something that can be broken
I can do it in two keystrokes: su. Where are all your wonderful fucking permissions now?
Windoze gets broken automatically and regularly
That's odd, I've been running windows 2000 since it came out and I haven't had to flatten and re-install once, nor has my system beem compromised once. Why is this? Because the problem is STILL between the keyboard and the chair.
Windows sucks. It's designed to control and screw the user. Information exchange and user functions are secondary goals to money making in Redmond.
Please tell me you don't believe any of what you've just said otherwise i'm going to have to kill myself right-fucking-now.
Tell me, what exactly is to stop these same dialers from operating on a linux machine? Provided a normal user can access the modem (which is almost always the case) there is NOTHING to stop malicious software from exploiting a browser hole, writing a script to the users' home directory and tagging a line on to the end of.bashrc, and performing exactly the same shit as you so vehemently attack windows of "being designed for?"
And that's without root access. What if the same script managed to exploit some unpactched security hole? Your machine could be turned into fucking spam relay, but hey! at least it'd be an ultra-fast, reliable, stable and open source spam relay!
Windows isn't the problem, linux (and don't say you didn't imply it) isn't the answer. The problem will always sit between the keyboard and the chair. It doesn't matter what the user is running on their computer, if there is money to be pried from their pockets, "Commercial software vendors" will be front and center, offering thousands of smiley faces at unbelieveble discount prices. If there aren't any ways to do it now, there will be soon, and as soon as there is they'll be there. Security through obscurity is nothing to hide behind. For an OS that only a fraction of desktop users use, there are more bugs discovered per month than there are in Windows, and if you think you can trust your average user to download a diff and patch their kernel to fix it you are sadly misguided.
"Oh look. Someone who pays for their software. they mustn't know much about anything at all. Here! This is plainly better than the software you were use, and its OPEN SOURCE BAYBEE! What's that? It's missing tons of features and functionality? Nonsense! I clearly know nothing about this software but I know you're doing it wrong. Here's another sub-standard tool that apt tells me does what I think you need. Tch! These WinBlowz users! They don't have the first clue!"
You know, lots of people roll their eyes when they see someone refer to Microsoft as 'M$' or Windows as 'WinBlowz' or something like that. Some people might even go as far as to flame you for it.
Personally, I'm all in favour of it! Nothing makes me happier when I see someone make fun of Microsoft in that way! You know why? Because the quicker I see 'M$' or 'WinDOS' in a comment, the quicker I can disregard everything you've wrote, scroll past your post and add you to my 'retarded peon' list, never to take anything you say seriously ever again, even if its something completely unrelated.
So, in future, please try and work your tired shots at microsoft in toward the beginning of your posts. Thanks!
Let me ask you this. If IBM and the rest of the rebels stole the plans to the incomplete Microsoft battlestation and Linus Torvalds managed to score that one-in-a-million shot at the exhaust port, do you think the galaxy would live happily ever after? No. To keep this in terms you can understand, IBM would probably proceed to corner the galaxy with their own software and things would be just as bad as they were before.
You people need to drop this romanticized view you have of this whole situation. Why do you think IBM would rather see an IT world without Microsoft? So that all software would be free and live happily ever after? Or perhaps becausre they're in business of making money and Microsoft is direct competition. You don't have to be Yoda to realise heir last attempt at a competing OS failed to make a dent and now they're jumping on a bandwagon running the closest behind Microsoft's.
Don't for one minute think that IBM has any moral interest in your cause, because they don't. Only your wallet.
Slashdot Mirror
Q: How do you run the original DOS Quake in Linux? A: You can't duh.
GNU/Linux is inherently more secure than Windows. Not least because GNU/Linux is a derivative of UNIX, which was designed from the bottom up to be a multi-user system. Permission-based security is a cornerstone feature of GNU/Linux, whereas Windows (being derived from DOS) can't implement a proper multi-user model for the sake of backward compatability.
... flaw?
when will people realize?
I can't believe I've just read that.
Please tell me you don't seriously believe that IBM has any moral or ethical interest in 'your' cause.
They are here to make money. Their last attempt at a competing operating system failed to dent the market in any way shape or form, so now, in their never-ending effort to take lead of the market, they're backing the nearest runner behind Microsoft, which happens to be open source.
Fucking beautiful. Absolutely beautiful.
The Linux vendors have an open process. Every one knows what the vulnerabilities are.
And yet, whenever a flaw is found in the latest 2.6 kernel, more often than not it can be traced all the way back to the early 2.4 kernels.
It may be open, but that doesn't mean everyone instantly knows they exist as soon as you hit 'save.'
If by 'people' he meant 'anyone who knows enough about both technologies to have an opinion' (ie., most people here) he'd be right. Most people (including myself) who use Windows by choice are in the same boat.
I can use Linux, I prefer the way it does certain things over the way Windows does them (such as the relatively stronger multi-user design, the stricter FHS, the nature of distribution, and so on and so forth). But sorry, all that counts for dick if I've got to fight with the fucking thing to do something as simple as dragging & dropping a file or cutting and pasting, while sacraficing other 'basic' UI elements & concepts that Windows users can take for granted. And don't even get me started on Xfree86.
So bundling, marketing and strong-arming have nothing to do with it?No. Why should I give a shit?
What you're saying is, if Linux tomorrow had an EVEN TIGHTER interface, everyone would switch?Yes, although owing to the nature of 'open source' in general, I wouldn't bank on seeing that happen this side of 2006. If at all.
There are few things funnier on slashdot than seeing the moderators jump all over a geniunely informative and non-offensive comment just because it happens to mention that Microsoft implemented a feature ages ago that is new in the linux kernel now.
Overrated! NO, Flamebait! NO, Troll! JUST MAKE HIM SHUT UP BEFORE ANYONE SEES IT, QUICK!
I've only just noticed, too.
That was the fault of the technology at the time, not DOS. Regardless, what you're on about there has nothing to do with the dos 'package management' system.
I'm glad you're amused, although at this point i'm obliged to refer you a physician regarding that attention-deficit disorder you seem to be displaying.
The really LOL part is that you continue to contradict yourself in each post and you don't look as though you even know it! Although I should probably feel bad laughing, after all, it isn't your fault.
I'm going to bed now, in the mean time I'd recommend you busy yourself with some colouring books or anything else that doesn't involve consuming sugar. If you find yourself getting overstimulated by what you read, take a break and count to ten. I'll be back in the morning.
You have pledged your allegience to Microsoft so in effect you have already pledged your allegience to satan.
LOLL0RZ BCUZ M!CRO$HAFT R EVIL AM I RITE GUYS???? RITE????
Apparently not only do you not have morals but you also can't read. I said nothing about capitalism or the evils thereof.
Well gosh darn shoot if that isn't just me giving people the benefit of the doubt again. See, the mistake I made there was that I assume that:
I am disgusted that you feel that you need to add your voice to the din raised by marketing companies, PR firms, paid for politicians, bought out analysts.
was actually you commenting on the state of american business, and not just re-gurgitating the same old tired spiel that you heard some bigger boys use without actually taking the time to think about what it meant first. My bad!
See, politicians getting paid off is part of every day business in America. Money buys the laws that keep these monopolies in the position they're in - money that goes to line the pockets of politicians to pay for their advertising campaigns to keep them in power! Money, advertising, greed, power! Tell me all that filth doesn't make your pecker just a little bit hard! You're starting to agree with me now, aren't you?
But resist! I know, pull out "your" my standards for myself are very low defense. Rephrased, it goes something like this:
Gee mommy, I didn't kill the neigbours dog, but then johnny went ahead and did it anyway, and now I can't do shit because Microsoft have a monopoly over the industry!
Tough shit, junior. That's the way it is. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer and the rich buy laws to make sure it stays that way. That's capitalism.
I am honestly curious though. Why did you pledge your allegience to MS? Why not Honda? They make nice stuff. Why not ghirardelli? They make tasty choclate. Why did you choose MS over all the other corporations in the world.
Honestly? Just because it pisses you off. That's about the only reason, really. You should be flattered!
Check again. or, link to something on a webserver you can see the logs to, and note that 80% of the user agent strings that hit that link are from one version of Windows or another. Slashdot is actually only marginally 'better' than the rest of the web as far as open source readers go.
"Slashdot has a tendency to continually bash MS."
SO FUCKING WHAT?
You sound like a retard, that's what's 'what.' The original poster made a lot of excellent and valid point. Then you come along, tell him that bash MS because you can, go off on a tangental tirade about the evils of capitalism, and get modded up for it.
Stop me if I'm wrong here, but I thought the tagline says 'News for NERDS.' Now, unless I missed the memo the queen sent out this morning that changed the meaning of the word 'nerd' to be synonymous with the word 'moron,' I'd say that Microsoft have a rather large part to play in that role. So, enter people such as yourself stage left, who are just going to bash them continually, blisfully ignorant of all the technology in question, simply because they're the biggest player in the field. And god help anyone who tries to reason otherwise, they're clearly leftist pinku commy faggots.
Christ, I'd swear allegience to satan if I knew you were batting for the other team. You are what is wrong with slashdot. Congratulations.
Most of Slashdot's reads are windows users.
Imagine how damaging this could be if the intruders got the source code! Now Microsoft can view our source!
Don't worry, it's worthless anyway
But . . it doesn't.
How is that funny? Is it funny because it might have been a valid comment 4 or 5 years ago? LOL LINUX LOSERS HOW'S THAT USB SUPPORT WORKING OUT FOR YOU? LOL +5 FUNNY!
Oh wait no, sorry. I get it! It must be funny because you're too retarded to set Windows up properly. You should be able to do that! Windows is for morons! lol +5 funny!
What makes you think Google wouldn't do the same thing if they thought they could get away with it? What makes you think they haven't been, and they have been getting away with it?
If anything, they're more likely to. You obviously hate MS (HURRRR M!CRO$HAFT) so much, what makes you think they won't play it straight with their search engine just to steal those few extra users from Google who're concerned about such things? Don't forget, Microsoft doesn't need the income, unlike Google.
More anti-Microsoft rhetoric. You'd think that MS bashing would be too mainstream to bother with these days.
Looks like a M$ fanboy losing his temper or being paid to look like they are. Tut, tut.
Don't flatter yourself.
With free software all hardware is controled by the kernel running as root.
How is this different to Winodows, Dumbass? Go on, name ONE piece of hardware on a standard Windows desktop that is driven from userspace. There aren't any, because in your fantastical world of free software wonderfulness and Microsoft villiany, you're forgetting the basic fucking principles of computer science i.e., what a 'kernel' is and does.Tell me, do you actually know ANYTHING about the way Windows is 'designed', or anything about good design at all for that matter? From the rest of your piss-poor arguments you could probably just guess you don't, but in this case I don't even need to do that, and this is why:
I've just written a mail client that opens attachments automatcally, runs, activex and javascripts without even prompting the user, and displays new messages as they are downloaded without asking either. I published it under the GPL, therefore it is free software. LOL not so safe now, are you? But wait! You're now going to tell me how you wouldn't run my mail reader in a million years because you only run quality software. Of course, I COULD actually use the same argument, or I could just state the fact that by default, microsoft outlook runs in restricted sites zone and will not allow the user to parse any harmful user attachments without specific re-configuration first. OH NO! FACTS! QUICK! DON'T LISTEN! MICROSOFT ARE EVIL AND FUCK BABIES! LALALALALALA!
My OS does not have files that I can't see or erase, so clean up is much easier to.
I am actually interested in what you meant with this little nugget of grammatic gold. In the rest of your post, you argue the merits of an operating system that the user can't fuck up even if they tried. Surely files you can't erase or even see would be nothing but beneficial to this argument? Either way, you're wrong, because contrary to your paranoid believe there are no such files in Windows.Then again, you have no idea what software I'm running
Yes! Just out of interest, boys and girls, this is one of the many reasons why free software will never hit the bigtime on desktop machines.
Worse for Billy boy, the number of holes in free software is low due to PEER REVIEW.
Just because its open source doesn't mean anyone is going to read it. This is why people uncover kernel exploits in 2.6 and trace the code waaay back to early in the 2.4 tree where it was introduced MONTHS ago. Why weren't they spotted as soon as the code was released? If that particular developer got of of bed on the wrong side that morning would the flaw have been spotted at all? This, of course, makes you wonder. Then dismiss your argument as being retarded trash.
A Linux, Solaris, OSX or BSD user has to try very hard to make their computer something that can be broken
I can do it in two keystrokes: su. Where are all your wonderful fucking permissions now?
Windoze gets broken automatically and regularly
That's odd, I've been running windows 2000 since it came out and I haven't had to flatten and re-install once, nor has my system beem compromised once. Why is this? Because the problem is STILL between the keyboard and the chair.
What the fuck is this shit?
Windows sucks. It's designed to control and screw the user. Information exchange and user functions are secondary goals to money making in Redmond.
Please tell me you don't believe any of what you've just said otherwise i'm going to have to kill myself right-fucking-now.Tell me, what exactly is to stop these same dialers from operating on a linux machine? Provided a normal user can access the modem (which is almost always the case) there is NOTHING to stop malicious software from exploiting a browser hole, writing a script to the users' home directory and tagging a line on to the end of .bashrc, and performing exactly the same shit as you so vehemently attack windows of "being designed for?"
And that's without root access. What if the same script managed to exploit some unpactched security hole? Your machine could be turned into fucking spam relay, but hey! at least it'd be an ultra-fast, reliable, stable and open source spam relay!
Windows isn't the problem, linux (and don't say you didn't imply it) isn't the answer. The problem will always sit between the keyboard and the chair. It doesn't matter what the user is running on their computer, if there is money to be pried from their pockets, "Commercial software vendors" will be front and center, offering thousands of smiley faces at unbelieveble discount prices. If there aren't any ways to do it now, there will be soon, and as soon as there is they'll be there. Security through obscurity is nothing to hide behind. For an OS that only a fraction of desktop users use, there are more bugs discovered per month than there are in Windows, and if you think you can trust your average user to download a diff and patch their kernel to fix it you are sadly misguided.
QuickTime
RealPlayer
Fuck, where do I sign?
...safe in the knowledge that the VIRUS SQUAD are dissecting viruses for me AS WE SPEAK!
ACTIVATE TEAM VIRUS SQUAD! GO FOR GLORY!
Typical.
"Oh look. Someone who pays for their software. they mustn't know much about anything at all. Here! This is plainly better than the software you were use, and its OPEN SOURCE BAYBEE! What's that? It's missing tons of features and functionality? Nonsense! I clearly know nothing about this software but I know you're doing it wrong. Here's another sub-standard tool that apt tells me does what I think you need. Tch! These WinBlowz users! They don't have the first clue!"
You know, lots of people roll their eyes when they see someone refer to Microsoft as 'M$' or Windows as 'WinBlowz' or something like that. Some people might even go as far as to flame you for it.
Personally, I'm all in favour of it! Nothing makes me happier when I see someone make fun of Microsoft in that way! You know why? Because the quicker I see 'M$' or 'WinDOS' in a comment, the quicker I can disregard everything you've wrote, scroll past your post and add you to my 'retarded peon' list, never to take anything you say seriously ever again, even if its something completely unrelated.
So, in future, please try and work your tired shots at microsoft in toward the beginning of your posts. Thanks!
Let me ask you this. If IBM and the rest of the rebels stole the plans to the incomplete Microsoft battlestation and Linus Torvalds managed to score that one-in-a-million shot at the exhaust port, do you think the galaxy would live happily ever after? No. To keep this in terms you can understand, IBM would probably proceed to corner the galaxy with their own software and things would be just as bad as they were before.
You people need to drop this romanticized view you have of this whole situation. Why do you think IBM would rather see an IT world without Microsoft? So that all software would be free and live happily ever after? Or perhaps becausre they're in business of making money and Microsoft is direct competition. You don't have to be Yoda to realise heir last attempt at a competing OS failed to make a dent and now they're jumping on a bandwagon running the closest behind Microsoft's.
Don't for one minute think that IBM has any moral interest in your cause, because they don't. Only your wallet.