As to your 40+ workstations that have been switched to Windows... welcome to hell. If you think a little integration work in a heterogenous environment is hard, just wait for what Redmond's incompetence has in store for you. Your CEO won't be the one suffering, you (or the poor schmuck who replaces you after the next round of worms/trojans/viruses and other Microsoft goodies goes around) will be. *BSD and Linux aren't perfect, but their a damn sight better and easier to administer than Windows, and have the added benefit of working as well. Frankly, if you and your CEO were so hell bent on having something easy to integrate and use, and are obviously so willing to exchange flexibility to get it, you should have chosen to go with Apple for both your clients and servers. You would have traded less of your flexibility away, ended up with something much more solid and reliable than windows, and much easier to administer, and prevented a whole lot of heartache down the road. But then, I suspect your post is more of a dig at Linux and promotion of Windoze than it is a true history of some company actually being stupid enough to dump Linux for Windows.
You say that linux and bsd are a damn sight easier to administer then windows, yet you don't give any examples. Keeping a windows pc up to date is easy with automatic updates. Just set a time each day to check and it'll download, install, and reboot if there are any new patches. And with a windows domain, you can use software update services then where you control which patches have been approved or not. Where can you do that in linux right now? Your post seems to be full of empty threats mainly with no real concrete evidence. Any admin of a network of windows machines, knows to put them all behind a nat firewall at the very least and only to assign public ip's to the servers that need them, still behind a firewall though to block certain ports. Just like you would do in linux. But it's the fundementals that linux needs to get right that is it's weakness. Just look at the current state of the printing system for linux. Documentation is incomplete. So even if you do read it, it won't help you much. Way beyond the typical computer user. And just like e-mail attachment viruses, that is the end user choice to run it. They just gotta be informed not to run every attachment they get.
And as for your next windows virus/worm that could be coming, that was only widespread because admins hadn't installed patches that had been out for months. So it's not like Microsoft had not done anything about it.
Ooh if they decide to do the filming in Vancouver, that be sweet:D I'll be on the look out for the set then and the actors. I might even see T'pal then. That be even more sweet:D
Actually linux needs alot of standardization in it. Standard gui, standard cli as in using bash for example, standard sound package utility, standard install/removal (just been completed so I'm happy), standard libraries, etc. Right now all it really is, is a glorified appliance OS. Windows isn't, and that was fixed way back with Windows 95.
Windows makes it easy for developers to develop on because all these standards have already been set in their OS and so they're better prepared to say they're app works in all flavours of windows and just have one release of it instead of having several releases for every version of windows out there, like they have to do with linux distros right now. Linux can be a platform OS instead of an appliance OS. I know it can.
And plus look at the version of firefox that comes with it, 1.0. 1.0.3 is now out. Can I go and install a new version of firefox without it having to be made for that specific distro? Nope, not yet anyways.
And why isn't there any open source gui front ends? This looks like an area that is lacking and can easily be filled by open source programmers. But in order to have a good workable gui, companies have gotta come up with it since they request customer feedback, have usability experts, etc. And of course having an open source gui front end wouldn't easily happen since the programmers thinking is that its good enough for me to use, its good enough for everyone else to use.
Well it's not slashdot's fault completely. The original story is misleading. It said that aol chatroom monitor lured 15-year old into sex, yet it said she was 17 when he tried to lure her, not 15. It may have started when she was 15, but it actually happened when she was 17. Slashdot should have cleared this in the summary they wrote though.
So the main reason why linus switched was because some buddies of his that worked with him didn't like bitkeeper because it was proprietary. Nevermind the fact that linus himself said it made him twice as productive when he started to use it. I myself don't really care if a program is proprietary or not. If it works for me, I'll use it. These opensource advocates need to get off their high horse and not judge a piece of software based on whether it's proprietary or opensource, but instead judge it based on what you can do with the program. BitKeeper was one of those proprietary programs that worked great for it's use. But because it was proprietary and not opensource, it was disliked by some.
neilson ratings are the reason why star trek enterprise got cancelled. It may have had a huge fan following, but because of the innacuracies of neilson's rating system, it makes it look like low numbers, when in fact it's nothing but an estimate.
Well looks like linux is getting to be more and more easier to use. Having one install program that works across all distributions is great. Just like the windows world. And that's the way I like it.
No one wants to pay $50 - $100 an hour for a qualified person to come to their house and tell them that their computer would run fine if they would stop visiting so many porn sites.
Yes this is why their are so many "unqualified amateur computer repair people" out their. People realize that for most of them, compared to someone thats qualified, the basics is what most of them know already before they went to college/university.
That is also why most computer repair places don't guarantee that your data will be saved and to back it up before you bring your computer in to be fixed.
So your reason for choosing a computer repair person that is not qualified is that compared to a qualified computer repair person, they know all the same basic knowledge. The difference being price.
I think it's the future. Any scifi program, like star trek, has everyone's dna on file when they investigated crimes. It also helped with identifying the deceased when no one comes to claim the body. Also there are numerous crimes where they collect dna evidence but they don't have a match to the current database at hand because the person that likely did it, never had a criminal record nor was a suspect in another crime where their dna sample was collected to clear them as a suspect. People's dna can be added if they were a suspect in a previous crime, even if they were cleared of it, the dna is still kept.
Now the only thing we gotta worry about is if a dna sample gets messed up and wrongly identifies someone in a crime.
My opinion, it is a good thing to have everyone's dna on file. Same thing with thumb prints. Just make sure measures are put in check to make sure nothing can get messed up. Having multiple databases would help.
finally linux distro's are starting to make sense. I like having a yearly release, or better yet, once every 3 or so years would be the best. This way you can really work on features that you wanna add to your distro, plus its cheaper in the long run for support costs. IE 1 release instead of 2.
You sir, unfortunately are stuck in a Windows frame of mind.
I just find windows a whole lot easier to manage, thats all.
There are different ways of installing programs in a unix environment. The first, more efficient and sometimes more complex way is to install it into you system structure directly. What this does is it copis binary's into the/bin and/usr/bin directories and generally uses shared libraries included in your system. This method generally has dependencies and can be harder to remove.
Sounds just like what windows components in add/remove programs does. But why do I have thousands of packages to choose from. If someo of those packages are just dependencies for other packages and don't serve any oher purpose other then that, why am I allowed to install them by themselves? Linux really needs to simplify the grouping of its components of its OS if it wants to continue using the package management system. It'll have the same amount of packages, the user will just have an easier time adding and removing features from their OS like they can in windows. For example, if you want to install vi, u shouldn't have the option to install vi libraries as well. You should have just vi their to add or remove. This will then add or remove any dependencies that vi has.
The second way to install programs is in the/opt directory. Here everything the program needs is installed and it generally doesn't have any dependencies. To uninstall from here you need simply to delete the directory.
And what about the symbolic links that the program may need to create to add itself to the programs menu in kde or gnome, whichever one the user is using at the time.
Uninstallers are really necessary in windows because of the registry (which is a bad idea poorly implemented)
I still prefer having an uninstaller that makes it just as easy to remove a program as it is to install it. Having to go through the directory structure I think shouldn't be necessary if you want to remove a program. An uninstaller for the program is so much more simpler because it does all the work for you.
Some distro's have their own tools and the makefile system can also be used.
I mentioned the makefile system, though not using those words when I mentioned that compiling, installing and removing programs from source can be easy to do.
I suggest doing some research into unix philosophies. The more I learn the more I am impressed. I am sure you will be too!
The Unix system was invented back in the 60's. It's time for it to modernize. You mentioned that there is/usr/bin and/bin/ in the unix/linux file system. Those were originally there because of the limited storage space at the time since some programs could be offloaded onto tape and only loaded up if needed to. Their is a linux project out their to modernize the file system. Let's hope it succeeds.
where you can only run the applications that come from your vendor, can't run third party programs without having to modify them to work with the distro. If you want a newer version of an app and your distro hasn't released a package of the app for their distribution, then u can either try installing from the official sources, including some extra steps that the distro would normally need to do such as adding icons to the programs menu that you now need to do yourself.
Windows has all this already. I wish linux would stop being treated like an embedded OS and instead be treated like an OS that windows is where there is one installer for all windows versions that doesn't need to be adjusted to work with them all, it just does. That's the main advantage windows has and one that I'd love it if linux had it.
I do remember when windows applications didn't have an uninstall program and you had to go in and delete all the files that were copied onto your hard drive including shortcuts. That's where linux is at. It needs to have the ability to install any program with any distro and be able to remove that program easily if necessary.
I do know that when compiling and installing from source, some programs have a removal feature as well which is great. So it's a start.
The packaging systems are just there to lock the users in, nothing more.
Well if we do end up using this kind of oil, members of PETA are gonna get pissed. It means they can no longer drive cars that use any kind of fossil fuel now as they'll be going against their very beliefs. Same thing with vegans.
well it looks like star trek history will come true once again. Where in there it said back in the 21st century kryogenics was developed and humans tried it out. It soon died out though as it was only a fad. This was from Star Trek TNG Season 1 Episode 25.
This is very true. How can you expect anybody to figure out how a computer works when all the inner workings are hidden from them, or they aren't even accessible.
read a book on it.
This is why I like Linux. Even though most of the time I use the GUI, I know that I could do everything by the command prompt if I wanted to.
I don't know about you, but I "prefer" working in the gui and not the command prompt. The only time I use the command prompt is when I'm working remotely and can't use the gui remotely, which is rare.
This is what's gone wrong with TV's.
The TV is an appliance. It works just fine the way it is. If it doesn't turn on, it usually means something inside it is physically broken, not the firmware being corrupt or anything. When it comes to the consumer, with most things in the home, they want appliances, not more computers. If they want a computer, they go out and buy one. You can't change tv's now, they're appliances plain and simple.
You should be able to perform everything with the buttons on the TV, but most of the time, the remote control is needed. If you lose the remote, then you lose a lot of functionality.
Would you rather have to get up everytime you have to change a channel or adjust the volume? This is the reason why the remote has all the functionality. People are lazy. They don't want to have to get up to do any of that. If you lose the remote to your tv, then that's your fault. And besides, universal remotes are cheap now a days.
I take gui's versus command line like multiple choice tests versus written tests. The human mind has an easier time when given choices. That's what a gui does as well as multiple choice tests. They give choices. With the command line as well as written tests, you have to know everything in advance. Not as easy.
Well said. Especially all of you out there saying you'll introduce your kid to linux. Well what if they wanna try out windows or even a mac? Are you going to stop them then? I should hope not. I say buy a family computer, put a linux distro on it and windows. Let them use both and then they can decide which one they'd rather use. After that, if they're not interested in computers like you are, leave it be. They will find something they're interesed on their own. You just gotta give them the choice.
my first computing experience was using a 286 typing at the command prompt not knowing exactly what to type. And I think my first commands I found was dir and cd. My first game was sokoban that I played on their.
actually a better analogy is that users who don't want to learn how to protect themselves while they use their computer to go on the internet is the same thing as drivers who when they're driving will go through a red light over and over even though they're not supposed to. Now usually that doesn't happen because the percieved danger is their and is greater to the driver if they do that alot. Now computer users on the other hand don't recognize the amount of danger that things like phishing scams and spyware can cause because it's more of an invisible threat and doesn't impact their use on the computer right away the same way a driver going through a red light would cause an accident right away and the driver would understand that if he continued doing that, more accidents could occur. Ignorance is bliss with most computer users it seems and just makes me want to slap them upside the head.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Found this through google:
http://frontmotion.com/Firefox/
They still haven't worked out the GPO quite yet, but it's definately promising.
Well there are cracks/hacks out there that can decrypt the EFS. So it's not totally secure.
I'll respond to your reasons.
Firefox -- remove the windows spyware problem. Extensions! Tabs
Agreed. Great browser, really competes with IE in terms of ease of use.
Linux server -- better able to manage stuff
But can I manage it easily like I can with windows? Not quite yet.
Thunderbird/Evolution -- removes the email spam problem
Great client to use. Competitive with OE for sure. Even has spam capabilities which OE doesn't have.
Openoffice - Adequate. Free.
Adaquate? Yeah. Free to use. But if you had the choice of if you had to buy it or MS Office? Would you?
As to your 40+ workstations that have been switched to Windows ... welcome to hell. If you think a little integration work in a heterogenous environment is hard, just wait for what Redmond's incompetence has in store for you. Your CEO won't be the one suffering, you (or the poor schmuck who replaces you after the next round of worms/trojans/viruses and other Microsoft goodies goes around) will be. *BSD and Linux aren't perfect, but their a damn sight better and easier to administer than Windows, and have the added benefit of working as well. Frankly, if you and your CEO were so hell bent on having something easy to integrate and use, and are obviously so willing to exchange flexibility to get it, you should have chosen to go with Apple for both your clients and servers. You would have traded less of your flexibility away, ended up with something much more solid and reliable than windows, and much easier to administer, and prevented a whole lot of heartache down the road. But then, I suspect your post is more of a dig at Linux and promotion of Windoze than it is a true history of some company actually being stupid enough to dump Linux for Windows.
You say that linux and bsd are a damn sight easier to administer then windows, yet you don't give any examples. Keeping a windows pc up to date is easy with automatic updates. Just set a time each day to check and it'll download, install, and reboot if there are any new patches. And with a windows domain, you can use software update services then where you control which patches have been approved or not. Where can you do that in linux right now? Your post seems to be full of empty threats mainly with no real concrete evidence. Any admin of a network of windows machines, knows to put them all behind a nat firewall at the very least and only to assign public ip's to the servers that need them, still behind a firewall though to block certain ports. Just like you would do in linux. But it's the fundementals that linux needs to get right that is it's weakness. Just look at the current state of the printing system for linux. Documentation is incomplete. So even if you do read it, it won't help you much. Way beyond the typical computer user. And just like e-mail attachment viruses, that is the end user choice to run it. They just gotta be informed not to run every attachment they get.
And as for your next windows virus/worm that could be coming, that was only widespread because admins hadn't installed patches that had been out for months. So it's not like Microsoft had not done anything about it.
Ooh if they decide to do the filming in Vancouver, that be sweet :D I'll be on the look out for the set then and the actors. I might even see T'pal then. That be even more sweet :D
Nice reply, too bad u avoided every one of my points that I made. Shows that my points are valid.
is this where the aerospace union corporation originated from?
Actually linux needs alot of standardization in it. Standard gui, standard cli as in using bash for example, standard sound package utility, standard install/removal (just been completed so I'm happy), standard libraries, etc. Right now all it really is, is a glorified appliance OS. Windows isn't, and that was fixed way back with Windows 95.
Windows makes it easy for developers to develop on because all these standards have already been set in their OS and so they're better prepared to say they're app works in all flavours of windows and just have one release of it instead of having several releases for every version of windows out there, like they have to do with linux distros right now. Linux can be a platform OS instead of an appliance OS. I know it can.
And plus look at the version of firefox that comes with it, 1.0. 1.0.3 is now out. Can I go and install a new version of firefox without it having to be made for that specific distro? Nope, not yet anyways.
And why isn't there any open source gui front ends? This looks like an area that is lacking and can easily be filled by open source programmers. But in order to have a good workable gui, companies have gotta come up with it since they request customer feedback, have usability experts, etc. And of course having an open source gui front end wouldn't easily happen since the programmers thinking is that its good enough for me to use, its good enough for everyone else to use.
Well it's not slashdot's fault completely. The original story is misleading. It said that aol chatroom monitor lured 15-year old into sex, yet it said she was 17 when he tried to lure her, not 15. It may have started when she was 15, but it actually happened when she was 17. Slashdot should have cleared this in the summary they wrote though.
So the main reason why linus switched was because some buddies of his that worked with him didn't like bitkeeper because it was proprietary. Nevermind the fact that linus himself said it made him twice as productive when he started to use it. I myself don't really care if a program is proprietary or not. If it works for me, I'll use it. These opensource advocates need to get off their high horse and not judge a piece of software based on whether it's proprietary or opensource, but instead judge it based on what you can do with the program. BitKeeper was one of those proprietary programs that worked great for it's use. But because it was proprietary and not opensource, it was disliked by some.
neilson ratings are the reason why star trek enterprise got cancelled. It may have had a huge fan following, but because of the innacuracies of neilson's rating system, it makes it look like low numbers, when in fact it's nothing but an estimate.
Well looks like linux is getting to be more and more easier to use. Having one install program that works across all distributions is great. Just like the windows world. And that's the way I like it.
No one wants to pay $50 - $100 an hour for a qualified person to come to their house and tell them that their computer would run fine if they would stop visiting so many porn sites.
Yes this is why their are so many "unqualified amateur computer repair people" out their. People realize that for most of them, compared to someone thats qualified, the basics is what most of them know already before they went to college/university.
That is also why most computer repair places don't guarantee that your data will be saved and to back it up before you bring your computer in to be fixed.
So your reason for choosing a computer repair person that is not qualified is that compared to a qualified computer repair person, they know all the same basic knowledge. The difference being price.
I think it's the future. Any scifi program, like star trek, has everyone's dna on file when they investigated crimes. It also helped with identifying the deceased when no one comes to claim the body. Also there are numerous crimes where they collect dna evidence but they don't have a match to the current database at hand because the person that likely did it, never had a criminal record nor was a suspect in another crime where their dna sample was collected to clear them as a suspect. People's dna can be added if they were a suspect in a previous crime, even if they were cleared of it, the dna is still kept. Now the only thing we gotta worry about is if a dna sample gets messed up and wrongly identifies someone in a crime. My opinion, it is a good thing to have everyone's dna on file. Same thing with thumb prints. Just make sure measures are put in check to make sure nothing can get messed up. Having multiple databases would help.
finally linux distro's are starting to make sense. I like having a yearly release, or better yet, once every 3 or so years would be the best. This way you can really work on features that you wanna add to your distro, plus its cheaper in the long run for support costs. IE 1 release instead of 2.
You sir, unfortunately are stuck in a Windows frame of mind.
/bin and /usr/bin directories and generally uses shared libraries included in your system. This method generally has dependencies and can be harder to remove.
/opt directory. Here everything the program needs is installed and it generally doesn't have any dependencies. To uninstall from here you need simply to delete the directory.
/usr/bin and /bin/ in the unix/linux file system. Those were originally there because of the limited storage space at the time since some programs could be offloaded onto tape and only loaded up if needed to. Their is a linux project out their to modernize the file system. Let's hope it succeeds.
I just find windows a whole lot easier to manage, thats all.
There are different ways of installing programs in a unix environment. The first, more efficient and sometimes more complex way is to install it into you system structure directly. What this does is it copis binary's into the
Sounds just like what windows components in add/remove programs does. But why do I have thousands of packages to choose from. If someo of those packages are just dependencies for other packages and don't serve any oher purpose other then that, why am I allowed to install them by themselves? Linux really needs to simplify the grouping of its components of its OS if it wants to continue using the package management system. It'll have the same amount of packages, the user will just have an easier time adding and removing features from their OS like they can in windows. For example, if you want to install vi, u shouldn't have the option to install vi libraries as well. You should have just vi their to add or remove. This will then add or remove any dependencies that vi has.
The second way to install programs is in the
And what about the symbolic links that the program may need to create to add itself to the programs menu in kde or gnome, whichever one the user is using at the time.
Uninstallers are really necessary in windows because of the registry (which is a bad idea poorly implemented)
I still prefer having an uninstaller that makes it just as easy to remove a program as it is to install it. Having to go through the directory structure I think shouldn't be necessary if you want to remove a program. An uninstaller for the program is so much more simpler because it does all the work for you.
Some distro's have their own tools and the makefile system can also be used.
I mentioned the makefile system, though not using those words when I mentioned that compiling, installing and removing programs from source can be easy to do.
I suggest doing some research into unix philosophies. The more I learn the more I am impressed. I am sure you will be too!
The Unix system was invented back in the 60's. It's time for it to modernize. You mentioned that there is
where you can only run the applications that come from your vendor, can't run third party programs without having to modify them to work with the distro. If you want a newer version of an app and your distro hasn't released a package of the app for their distribution, then u can either try installing from the official sources, including some extra steps that the distro would normally need to do such as adding icons to the programs menu that you now need to do yourself.
Windows has all this already. I wish linux would stop being treated like an embedded OS and instead be treated like an OS that windows is where there is one installer for all windows versions that doesn't need to be adjusted to work with them all, it just does. That's the main advantage windows has and one that I'd love it if linux had it.
I do remember when windows applications didn't have an uninstall program and you had to go in and delete all the files that were copied onto your hard drive including shortcuts. That's where linux is at. It needs to have the ability to install any program with any distro and be able to remove that program easily if necessary.
I do know that when compiling and installing from source, some programs have a removal feature as well which is great. So it's a start.
The packaging systems are just there to lock the users in, nothing more.
Well if we do end up using this kind of oil, members of PETA are gonna get pissed. It means they can no longer drive cars that use any kind of fossil fuel now as they'll be going against their very beliefs. Same thing with vegans.
well it looks like star trek history will come true once again. Where in there it said back in the 21st century kryogenics was developed and humans tried it out. It soon died out though as it was only a fad. This was from Star Trek TNG Season 1 Episode 25.
This is very true. How can you expect anybody to figure out how a computer works when all the inner workings are hidden from them, or they aren't even accessible.
read a book on it.
This is why I like Linux. Even though most of the time I use the GUI, I know that I could do everything by the command prompt if I wanted to.
I don't know about you, but I "prefer" working in the gui and not the command prompt. The only time I use the command prompt is when I'm working remotely and can't use the gui remotely, which is rare.
This is what's gone wrong with TV's.
The TV is an appliance. It works just fine the way it is. If it doesn't turn on, it usually means something inside it is physically broken, not the firmware being corrupt or anything. When it comes to the consumer, with most things in the home, they want appliances, not more computers. If they want a computer, they go out and buy one. You can't change tv's now, they're appliances plain and simple.
You should be able to perform everything with the buttons on the TV, but most of the time, the remote control is needed. If you lose the remote, then you lose a lot of functionality.
Would you rather have to get up everytime you have to change a channel or adjust the volume? This is the reason why the remote has all the functionality. People are lazy. They don't want to have to get up to do any of that. If you lose the remote to your tv, then that's your fault. And besides, universal remotes are cheap now a days.
I take gui's versus command line like multiple choice tests versus written tests. The human mind has an easier time when given choices. That's what a gui does as well as multiple choice tests. They give choices. With the command line as well as written tests, you have to know everything in advance. Not as easy.
Well said. Especially all of you out there saying you'll introduce your kid to linux. Well what if they wanna try out windows or even a mac? Are you going to stop them then? I should hope not. I say buy a family computer, put a linux distro on it and windows. Let them use both and then they can decide which one they'd rather use. After that, if they're not interested in computers like you are, leave it be. They will find something they're interesed on their own. You just gotta give them the choice.
my first computing experience was using a 286 typing at the command prompt not knowing exactly what to type. And I think my first commands I found was dir and cd. My first game was sokoban that I played on their.
Hey, I know a genuine 'Panaphonics' when I see one.
...and look, there's magnetbox and sorny.
actually a better analogy is that users who don't want to learn how to protect themselves while they use their computer to go on the internet is the same thing as drivers who when they're driving will go through a red light over and over even though they're not supposed to. Now usually that doesn't happen because the percieved danger is their and is greater to the driver if they do that alot. Now computer users on the other hand don't recognize the amount of danger that things like phishing scams and spyware can cause because it's more of an invisible threat and doesn't impact their use on the computer right away the same way a driver going through a red light would cause an accident right away and the driver would understand that if he continued doing that, more accidents could occur. Ignorance is bliss with most computer users it seems and just makes me want to slap them upside the head. :)