How many serious Unix-like OS users actually try to push it as a desktop system though? I personally never would, nobody I know that uses it would, nobody that they know would, and so on, and so forth. In one sense, this article is completely right, it was made for servers and workstations with very specific uses in mind. The article however seems to make it sound like a huge abundance of Unix-like OS users are pushing for some desktop version of the systems. We're not, read around, ask your neighborhood geek. Most of the people I know can tell you just why it's not a desktop system for the common user right off the bat.
This wasn't something pushed by the entire community, but by the people wanting to profit on the "security" and "stability" of Unix and it's offspring. How many of you in the slashdot community have ever had a boss that sees something "neat", like podcasting or blogging, then immediately wastes the companies money and bandwidth on pet projects (hardware and software alike) without approval from the higher ups, then has the entire project blow up in their face even after you and everyone else in the department has warned them? How much did they actually study about it before they tried to implement it? A webpage or 2? Perhaps they skimmed a book?
Yes, i'll come out and say it now. I've told people Unix and it's derivatives are stable and secure if used and administered properly, but I don't stop there, i'll tell them how, and i'll tell them why they shouldn't use it unless they believe it's right for them. I don't advocate it to my next door neighbor and everyone in town because "Microsoft sucks and you should get Linux". As many of you have already said, intelligence is needed to completely the security puzzle, it doesn't matter if you have the most "secure" computer in the world if you allow root logins on SSH without a password, or leave your Windows shares open on all your Windows machines, or open executable e-mail attachments from a rich aunt you've never heard of in deepest darkest Africa, or, heaven forbid, rm -rf your / while logged in as root. It only takes one slip up to compromise your entire system.
So the people you've talked to aren't lying, Unix-like systems CAN be rather secure in the hands of a competent user, but in the same sense, a Windows system can also be reasonably secure in the hands of a competent user. Unfortunately not all of the people out there are well versed in their security-fu. So do us all a favor next time you write an article, be a bit more specific about who it was that was praising the "security" of *nix. I'm not a script kiddy, or a zealot, or a Microsoft hater, or a "1337 h4x0r", or whatever else you meant to be refering to. I for one didn't want the pointy-clicky desktop users over here on the *nix side to begin with. If they have the interest and the intellect then I invite you with open arms and would be more than glad to help you along the way, but don't put words in our mouths. We've all seen far far too many Linux VS Windows articles already, we should just be allowed to call dupe at this point since they're not making any new points.
(I appologize if any of this seemed vague. It's late, I have work in the morning, sorry for any spelling/grammarical errors. If you're going to respond, please only do so if you're not going to flame. It's a waste of both of our time. First person to find a spelling error gets a cookie. *snicker* Let the word hunt begin!)
I agree with your point overall, but the items you used weren't the greatest examples. When it comes to the base commands, the only reason that people know them is that it's in their vocabulary and the vocabulary of every other person that's been using a computer since DOS (and the such). "ls" obviously looks like "list", "ln" looks like "link", "cat" makes me think "concatenate", "/dev/" looks like "device", "less" does exactly what it says, displays "less" in a managable manner (less is more *insert snickering*), and so on. I don't think they're obscure as much as it's not the terminology that normal users grew up with. They grew up with DOS and Windows and "dir","cd","C:/" and so on (Current Windows variants use | (pipe) as well on the command line). If they had grown up in a *nix dominated world, the same thing could be said about Windows commands. However when it comes to many other applications, I agree with you completely. A few good examples would be "sex" the image view and video player, "awk" was a decent example though because the first thing I think of is a bird for some reason, same with "feh" the image viewer, and so on. They're all very nice apps which I use daily, but the names alone would confuse the crap out of a normal user.
I'll explain myself further if you have any questions or comments. I can be confusing at times. =(
P.S. Windows command line commands are quite easy to find for one obvious reason really (not just the names). Type "help" at a command line in Windows.
If something like this passes I wonder who else will try to profit on such ideas.
"In other news, the FDA is changing their name to the FDAA, and is sueing over 2,000,000 americans for creating 'McDonalds Like' cheeseburgers and shakes. A shocked McDonalds representative was quoted as saying 'We can't believe the wide scale of this operation, and hope that with the combined efforts of the FDAA and the McDonalds corporation, we can stop this blatent copyright infringement and bring these crooks to justice!'. More at 11."
Slashdot Mirror
...anyone up for a game of "The Sims"? *snicker*
How many serious Unix-like OS users actually try to push it as a desktop system though? I personally never would, nobody I know that uses it would, nobody that they know would, and so on, and so forth. In one sense, this article is completely right, it was made for servers and workstations with very specific uses in mind. The article however seems to make it sound like a huge abundance of Unix-like OS users are pushing for some desktop version of the systems. We're not, read around, ask your neighborhood geek. Most of the people I know can tell you just why it's not a desktop system for the common user right off the bat.
This wasn't something pushed by the entire community, but by the people wanting to profit on the "security" and "stability" of Unix and it's offspring. How many of you in the slashdot community have ever had a boss that sees something "neat", like podcasting or blogging, then immediately wastes the companies money and bandwidth on pet projects (hardware and software alike) without approval from the higher ups, then has the entire project blow up in their face even after you and everyone else in the department has warned them? How much did they actually study about it before they tried to implement it? A webpage or 2? Perhaps they skimmed a book?
Yes, i'll come out and say it now. I've told people Unix and it's derivatives are stable and secure if used and administered properly, but I don't stop there, i'll tell them how, and i'll tell them why they shouldn't use it unless they believe it's right for them. I don't advocate it to my next door neighbor and everyone in town because "Microsoft sucks and you should get Linux". As many of you have already said, intelligence is needed to completely the security puzzle, it doesn't matter if you have the most "secure" computer in the world if you allow root logins on SSH without a password, or leave your Windows shares open on all your Windows machines, or open executable e-mail attachments from a rich aunt you've never heard of in deepest darkest Africa, or, heaven forbid, rm -rf your / while logged in as root. It only takes one slip up to compromise your entire system.
So the people you've talked to aren't lying, Unix-like systems CAN be rather secure in the hands of a competent user, but in the same sense, a Windows system can also be reasonably secure in the hands of a competent user. Unfortunately not all of the people out there are well versed in their security-fu. So do us all a favor next time you write an article, be a bit more specific about who it was that was praising the "security" of *nix. I'm not a script kiddy, or a zealot, or a Microsoft hater, or a "1337 h4x0r", or whatever else you meant to be refering to. I for one didn't want the pointy-clicky desktop users over here on the *nix side to begin with. If they have the interest and the intellect then I invite you with open arms and would be more than glad to help you along the way, but don't put words in our mouths. We've all seen far far too many Linux VS Windows articles already, we should just be allowed to call dupe at this point since they're not making any new points.
(I appologize if any of this seemed vague. It's late, I have work in the morning, sorry for any spelling/grammarical errors. If you're going to respond, please only do so if you're not going to flame. It's a waste of both of our time. First person to find a spelling error gets a cookie. *snicker* Let the word hunt begin!)
...just like ma' Bell used to make. =)
I agree with your point overall, but the items you used weren't the greatest examples. When it comes to the base commands, the only reason that people know them is that it's in their vocabulary and the vocabulary of every other person that's been using a computer since DOS (and the such). "ls" obviously looks like "list", "ln" looks like "link", "cat" makes me think "concatenate", "/dev/" looks like "device", "less" does exactly what it says, displays "less" in a managable manner (less is more *insert snickering*), and so on. I don't think they're obscure as much as it's not the terminology that normal users grew up with. They grew up with DOS and Windows and "dir","cd","C:/" and so on (Current Windows variants use | (pipe) as well on the command line). If they had grown up in a *nix dominated world, the same thing could be said about Windows commands. However when it comes to many other applications, I agree with you completely. A few good examples would be "sex" the image view and video player, "awk" was a decent example though because the first thing I think of is a bird for some reason, same with "feh" the image viewer, and so on. They're all very nice apps which I use daily, but the names alone would confuse the crap out of a normal user.
I'll explain myself further if you have any questions or comments. I can be confusing at times. =(
P.S. Windows command line commands are quite easy to find for one obvious reason really (not just the names). Type "help" at a command line in Windows.
If something like this passes I wonder who else will try to profit on such ideas.
"In other news, the FDA is changing their name to the FDAA, and is sueing over 2,000,000 americans for creating 'McDonalds Like' cheeseburgers and shakes. A shocked McDonalds representative was quoted as saying 'We can't believe the wide scale of this operation, and hope that with the combined efforts of the FDAA and the McDonalds corporation, we can stop this blatent copyright infringement and bring these crooks to justice!'. More at 11."