View Full Version : [OT] Recent Linux Commercials.
I've been see'in alot of them lately, you think linux is finally going to get alot of public use. Other than servers I mean; I've seen a good amount of Linux servers around but never seen a personal computer running Linux.
If Neocron / EVE worked on Linux I would switch would you?
Btw, those commercials are pretty kewl. They got that kid with white hair ;]
Originally posted by Cytaur
Linux's for nerds...... um.... thats probably one of the stupidest things ive ever fuckin heard...
the most secure OS made from a company that doesnt try to monopolize , yes must be for nerds, beware no way would you use it, no you might become a little smarter oh no, or maybe wont get viruses as easy
typical nerd talk when defending linux o_o who cares ? I'm happy with WinXP, why should I switch
Originally posted by Cytaur
typical nerd talk when defending linux o_o who cares ? I'm happy with WinXP, why should I switch
ok you read the news? every single new virus that you read about in the news, well it dont do shit to linux.
and typecal nerd talk? wtf are u talkin about im just talkin about how linux is better im far from a nerd , u gotta be smart to be a nerd.
and stop replyin to this thread if you dont like it
Gotterdammerung
31-01-04, 08:06
don't believe the hype
(p.s. and fight the power too)
Actualy I use Linux as my primary os. I just keep windows to play Neocron. I use Linux and i Love it. You have be motivated to use/learn it, because its totaly diffrent. I use it because of freedom, freedom to configure your comp the way you want it, and free to use.
Think of it, its free to use. Not like those pesky windows licenses. But anyway... who of you have actualy bought windows anyway. Take a look at "Trusted Computing" guys, some day soon... Windows in going to come and bite you in the arse. Looking forward to the day when you cant play your pirated music/vids anymore?
Use linux, use you brain. Keep it legal and clean.
Lord do you have to use windows? Is there a windows emulator? I've read a couple sites talking about Window and Mac OS emulators to use Windows / mac software.
sure u can use windows on linux, e.g. with winex or vmware, but u never get the performance u can have with a pure windows, so its not useable for playing, but its useable for applications which are only WINDOZE developed ... GIMP is cool, but most ppl prefer either photoshop or paintshop :) and both are not for any *NIX machine ...
many games have been already PATCHED to be fully *NIX playable, and u dont need a stupid window to play them, i hope many more will follow :p
Originally posted by Gotterdammerung
don't believe the hype
(p.s. and fight the power too)
Well, take a look at netcraft. Most of the worlds webservers use Apache with Linux or a BSD Flavour. It's been like this for a loooong time. Apache is most used, becuase Windows isnt that good. Plain and simple.
Yes it has been hyped a lot, but then again Linux is designed with security and performance in mind. Not like, Mircosoft who suddely found out that it would be nice. Redesigning/cleaning up a Os is a hell of a job.
--
Like the dude who implented windows scripting should be shot.
When you do IT management you actualy have to think about thinks like ROY and TCO. But the "normal user" has no need for this. For normal buissnes use it perfect. Free Os and free office suite.
Give it a few years and you will see Linux desktop boxes popping up all over the place.
Enough of me talking about Linux.
Originally posted by Shujin
Lord do you have to use windows? Is there a windows emulator? I've read a couple sites talking about Window and Mac OS emulators to use Windows / mac software.
I've been fiddelig a lot with it, and no go! The problem basicly lies in that it uses IE for the launcher. I've managed to bypass the IE thingy in the launcher but still, no go. The problem of incompability realy lies in that Windows and Linux uses two diffrent sets of binaries/libraries. Wine is a Linux implemtation of it, but its far from complete. I can use photoshop and office applications, but the DirectX is still a bit shabby.
Nash_Brigham
31-01-04, 08:39
Originally posted by Shujin
um.... thats probably one of the stupidest things ive ever fuckin heard...
the most secure OS made from a company that doesnt try to monopolize , yes must be for nerds, beware no way would you use it, no you might become a little smarter oh no, or maybe wont get viruses as easy Linux is secure because no one really tries to hack it right now, since it is pretty well known that everyone uses mostly Windows. When Linux ecomes very popular, it will be jsut as insecure as Windows.
Psycho Killa
31-01-04, 08:40
I will use linux when I can play neocrack on it.
linux is FAR from secure, its as secure as windows, and BOTH OSes relly to their USERs powers and knowledge, i use myself windows since win3.1, and i NEVER got any virus nor any worm on my system, cause i always knew what kind of site im looking at, and what type of settings i need in the security page of the IE
then one day i installed for fun and to test a *NIX system, it was SuSe 6.2 as i remember right, and right after the first step online into a ircnetwork i got *owned* but luckily it was a friend of mine who *owned* me and he imideatelly closed any secure holes he knew at this point
i know my windows, and now i know my *NIX router too, as much as i need to know it that its save from the most comon EXPLOITS and attacks
*NIX isnt save, for sure not, but the attacks get fixed in no time!!!
look on all those patches for *NIX systems, after 1-2 days of the realse of an exploit, theres a bugfix, or update
check windows, MS knows about many security holes, many of them exist since win95 and IE 3.0, and they still exist in the current IE architecture ...
THATS the difference...
well and as i said before, the USER is the most feared security hole, i got many friends of my parents who already got nearly every kind of worm and trojan, cause they click everything they see, without even thinking on it, that it might be a virus or trojan horse... the see "nice email - lets take a look on that super mega uber game which is attached - OMG MY SCREENS FADING - NOOO IM INFECTED..." u know that kind of stories all i guess :)
Your so-secure linux is because there're less people using it than windows, virus makers' goal is to harm as many people as possible, thus windows users since they're greater in number than linux users. Bugs and crashes is due to bad software or drivers (hardware) programming, single OS cannot support hundreds of thousands hardware pieces and millions of software. Trust me, if your linux had that much stuff for it, it would be buggy piece of shit as well.
cytaur beat me to it. its more secure because it isnt as popular. Although, it gets more hotfixes and general tweaking since its open source. open source = more input, hacking and cracking and people trying to exploit it. While with windows, its a team of self proclaimed uber programmers that never make mistakes. :lol:
Nash_Brigham
31-01-04, 08:59
Originally posted by WebShock
cytaur beat me to it. its more secure because it isnt as popular. Although, it gets more hotfixes and general tweaking since its open source. open source = more input, hacking and cracking and people trying to exploit it. While with windows, its a team of self proclaimed uber programmers that never make mistakes. :lol: I think that's because Microsoft is a big brand name company. After all, when you make enough money to fund several nations, I think you can walk around with big pants on to. As for Linux being open source, kinda bad move there really.
bet how many HARMFULL viruses and exploits and trojan horses and worms would be on any WINDOWS OS when it would be open source... as many as on any *NIX, NONE, when you keep your system always up to date :)
also windows haters are the general nay-sayers... it's like OMFG everyone's using windows, I must not, it sux, onoz.....
or those that hate japanese cars... idiots have you ever tried one ?
Well I argee with, that it is up to the user how secure his system is. But a few things, viruses will _never_ appear as we know them in windows, on linux. This is due to diffrence in architecture. Linux is most likely to have few viruses.
The os is as secure as the user, but keep in mind. The linux useres are mostly more computer litterate than most users. Hence more focus on security and updates. There are somewhat more fixes to linux at times, but these are not normaly exploitable, merely bug fixes.
The reason Windows is less secure than linux basicly comes down to one thing! Linux is designed with security in mind. Windows is not, its just a "feautre" that is beeing worked into the current code tree. This has to do with basic routines on how things work.
For windows to be realy secure, it should be redesigned from bottom up. This is not likely to happen, as it would most likely cause severe incompabilities.
The "Trusted Computing" thing is one of the ways they plan to fix this. But if you dig a bit deeper, it has some scary possibilities.
Cracks and exploits will be there in both systems, but windows is, in my opinion, more vunrable. If you wish i can explain this more in detail. (Maybe not today as i am getting reaaaaly tired. Yes been up all night playing neocrack. hehe.)
nothing is secure, it still is because either nobody bothered trying or there's no point of doing it.
Originally posted by Cytaur
nothing is secure, it still is because either nobody bothered trying or there's no point of doing it.
This might be true in some cases, but there is always more or less secure. IMO windows is less.
Edit - There are only one way to be truely secure, thats not being online.
There are some inherent design factors that make *NIX more secure than Windows... that's not hype, its fact.
The Windows platform includes a hell of a lot of features which give it is user friendly nature and allow all those pleathora of nice applications we run to work... problem is when you add a feature like a Global Address Book, which is accessible across mail tools, you add a risk... what if someone wrote their own little application to use this GAL - its actually a doddle really, MS being nice chaps publish their API with loads of examples... what instead of simply displaying address books this nasty little application emailed itself to everyone it the GAL...
The very nature of Windows supports both its popularity and its inherent security problems.
Now MS are trying to make amends and Win2k3 is a step in the right direction - instead of coming with everything switched on, the user has to make a conscious decision to enable a feature, and the process of enabling comes with all the warnings about what your really doing.
So you can have Windows, feature rich and insecure or *NIX, feature poor but solid as a rock... choice is yours, but as someone pointed out earlier (and it is pretty much irrefutable) Linux attracts nerds in droves (not saying its a bad thing... but I do suspect many nerds use it because its not MS, not because they get more producivity out of it).
R
Would you like to know why 99% of PC owners use Windows and will use it until end of times ? Because nobody is born a programmer to use your open source thingy.
Originally posted by Cytaur
Would you like to know why 99% of PC owners use Windows and will use it until end of times ? Because nobody is born a programmer to use your open source thingy.
thats completly WRONG
in germany already a few GOVERNMENT places ordered linux WORKSTATIONS !!! cause its much cheaper to use a star office then using MS OFFICE, and with KDE/GNOME(any other xmanager) u get nearly the same style as u get in MS Windows NT e.g.
u get the security cause u can block nearly everythig to the user, nearly the same es on winNT, and the user can handle it realy fast, cause its POINT AND CLICK as on WINDOWS, so u mean all those gov-employes are programmers cause they get such workstations?... i think your a little bit irritated =)
yeah but how much they paid to people that installed those systems, must have been 5 times the rate of average windows tech
they pay the same amount for a *NIX admin as for a MS certified admin, or even LESS then for the certified one :p
your comment lacks on proof ....
Alright you Linux fanboi, don't get excited.
Meh, Just use whatever you're comfortable using.
Aslong as you have a good firewall and an up to date virus checker you should be fine.
Originally posted by Cytaur
Linux's for nerds......
Just because you don't understand how it works, and don't have the brainpower to learn, doesn't mean its for neds.
Im a big unix fan, as a server platform windows can't come close, so ill always use unix as a server OS.
So cytor...no one cares that your just a construction worker who only knows how to click on the Neocron icon on your desktop, spare us.
Originally posted by CkVega
Meh, Just use whatever you're comfortable using.
Aslong as you have a good firewall and an up to date virus checker you should be fine.
Personal yes, Corporate no.
some steps for a secure network, there are loads more, but i think these are the most important.
- Good security policy (anti viral, passwords etc)
- Locked down servers & workstations, and well configured firewalls.
- Educated users.
I think the last one is the one most underestimated. A couple of monts ago i was at a company to do some freelance work for a friend. Since viral stuff are a bit of a threat i did a quick test. Created a tiny app that collected user info (username etc) and mailed them to the admin account. Put the subject "This is a virus DO NOT OPEN the attachment". 83% of the users did. What the heck goes thru peoples minds? "Humm.. virus eh. we must click on that one?!"
83% fucking percent. That just blew me away. At that moment i advised that ALL of the users must attend a mandatory Computer know-how class. The most of the mockups were actualy caused by users. Sure, you can have a pretty tight rigged setup, but if the users mockup you are back to square one.
Ofcouse we could have locked em so down that you couldnt use any of the applications except the ones we spesicfy, but when you have a lot of diffrent people working of diffrent tools, the list needs to be updated constantly. Witch again is a pain in the lower butt section.
Btw, bah im getting sleepy now. i should get some rest.
Originally posted by g0rt
Just because you don't understand how it works, and don't have the brainpower to learn, doesn't mean its for neds.
Im a big unix fan, as a server platform windows can't come close, so ill always use unix as a server OS.
So cytor...no one cares that your just a construction worker who only knows how to click on the Neocron icon on your desktop, spare us.
Yes, indeed. Even samba (windows file shareing server for *nix) out performs Windows 2003 Server (on the same hardware). When the native server performs less than the *nix one, you can start to ask. What the heck is realy so good about windows anyway? (atleast server wise)
Originally posted by LordError
Yes, indeed. Even samba (windows file shareing server for *nix) out performs Windows 2003 Server (on the same hardware). When the native server performs less than the *nix one, you can start to ask. What the heck is realy so good about windows anyway? (atleast server wise)
Windows is good for gaming and general use. It was never meant to be a server, it just kinda inherated a bunch of features from unix, and ripped off the entire novell netware structure (*caught* active directory), and added a few little things of its own.
p
o
s
Originally posted by g0rt
Windows is good for gaming and general use. It was never meant to be a server, it just kinda inherated a bunch of features from unix, and ripped off the entire novell netware structure (*caught* active directory), and added a few little things of its own.
p
o
s
Yes, that puts us back at the post i posted further up. Windows was never designed with security in mind. Server wise it preforms bad, has crappy security and is covered with bloat.
Conclusion: Windows as a server? Fat chance.
But then you guys prolly will start saying, but.... but... forget it. If you want eye candy 2003, use windows. You can even theme the GUI of the freaking server. Now whats the point of that?! Pure bloat.
Let me put it this way.
Windows: an ant that looks good and have pretty features (bugs). Just step on it. "/ (0/2)"
*nix family: Big bad Warbot (super titan, with hardend armor etc) " ********* (120000/120000)".
Some what over the top, but you get the picture.
Well, take a look at netcraft. Most of the worlds webservers use Apache with Linux or a BSD Flavour. It's been like this for a loooong time. Apache is most used, becuase Windows isnt that good. Plain and simple.
Except that you can get Apache for windows. :p
Would you like to know why 99% of PC owners use Windows and will use it until end of times ? Because nobody is born a programmer to use your open source thingy.
Actually the latest flavours of linux are easier then windows to install and use. The security is hell of a lot better (as long as you don't run as root, which is the norm for most Windows boxes).
There are still exploits, attacks, etc. Few famous ones but the difference between windows and Linux is there is normally a fix within a day for linux. MS take forever to fix security holes or don't bother.
For example the latest MS fix to stop hostile URL linking? Type the link in manually yourself.
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/30/0428242&mode=thread&tid=113&tid=126&tid=133&tid=172&tid=186&tid=95
(If you don't trust that link, type it in manually :p ).
Actually the whole idea behind linux security is that if theres a hole, you can FIX IT YOURSELF, no need to wait for a "fix".
iptables -j drop comes to mind as being usefull in many occasions
darkservent
31-01-04, 14:11
Originally posted by Archeus
Except that you can get Apache for windows. :p
Yes but the whole idea is stability. Running apache on windows is a risk cause by u opening a even a tiny prog is a risk. Linux is stable just cause the filesystem itself is million times better than windows.
well, if neocron would work it would be my main OS.
i know about the bad things of linux but im playing with it since a few years and done a lot of router/gateway stuff with it when windows was just able to start games.
to that secure thing. its just ow you configurate you system.
with my XP box on opera and webmail i never have a virus so its secure too.
personal touch is what makes a system secure if its linux or windows.
the thing i think that makes linux so secure is the fact that it is open, if you find a vulnerablity you can try to fix it your self, and if you know your not a programmer and couldnt do it your self then im sure 10000 others that can fix it are going to work on it.
with microsoft, if theres a vulnerability that lies in its coding microsoft gets their programmers to work on it. theres a limit to the amount of employees they can use, with linux, theres no limit on the amount of people working on it.
also with linux lets say if 1 person finds a much better way for linux to process, well they can implement it and send it out and others can aswell, with windows, they'd probably get sued.
ps. linux just plain out looks much kewler too ;]
I'd use linux if more games ran on it. Microsoft bought bioware and rare, fuck them.
to quote Macenzie
"LINUX IS DA BOMB"
Windows 2000 all the way for me though.
I would run Linux though if I had the choice between it and XP.
Declaration: I am a geek, nerd and linux 'fanboi'. I consider myself a mid-to-high-level linux newbie.
I am currently using linux full time for work (I am a web developer), running Macromedia Dreamweaver and Internet Explorer under Crossover Office (buy now while the exchange rate is good =) )
I do believe linux is breaking more into the desktop market, not at an overly fast rate, but it is definitely making progress. The software is getting easier to use all the time.
I have a little experiance with Windows 2000 Server. I installed it on a Duron 900 I use for linux testing mainly (swapped out the HDD). While linux allowed me to install a minimal set of tools, leaving me with a command line interface that worked fast, Windows 2000 gave me little choice on what would be installed, and started VERY slowly with its way over th top graphical interface with menu animations and shadows, mouse shadow and was basically unusable. That ends my experiance (the HDD was wiped for another project).
Personally I wouldn't like to see M$ 'overthrown', as some would. Competition and choice is always good. I do however disagree with the frankly stupid actions of companies like SCO who just try to kill the competition.
Personally I don't think there are many distro's that are quite ready for mass market desktop users yet. Most of the current installations are inn large companies, where the employees just use it and don't have to worry about maintainance, they have departments dedicated to do that. There are some tweaks that I would personally make, particularly in regards to user interface and installation, and also in terms of user friendly documentation (there is lots but some of it is very 'geek' orientated).
I think linux will become popular on the desktop, mainly because there are many existing users and developers who want it to be easier to use, therefore they submit changes and suggestions for changes, meaning that the software evolves.
There are also some areas where linux doesn't have user friendly programs to replace current Windows populars. Big ones include replacements / native installs of Access*, Dreamweaver*, Graphics Editing (Photoshop*, Fireworks) and others. Another big area is games. Altho some developers have been developing linux clients (many for quite some time), including Epic with the Unreal Tournament series, gaming is still a big problem with linux, altho some games will work with Wine / WineX.
I also use many open source packages on my Windows installs. I now use Open Office for office documents (word processing, spreadsheets). I use Xchat for IRC and Firebird for web browsing (all email is now done on linux under Mozilla).
I would love to see a linux port of Neocron that works well, or if it works well enough, cooperation between Reaktor and the Wine developers to solve existing problems (last time I checked there were problems with fonts when running under Wine).
Just my $0.02
Athon Solo
I'm not unhappy with Windows enough to switch to Linux. All my games work, and security on any system is not as bad as some people claim as long as you have a user who knows what he's doing. I don't leave the comp unattended for more than a few minutes so if I am hacked or anything I'll be at the comp to see it. It's fairly obvious when my HDD suddenly starts accessing for no reason, or I lag (I'm on 56k atm). And even I did get hacked and my HDD was wiped, I have backups, so nothing lost there, and if somehow part of my hardware was damaged I'd rather pay to replace a couple of components than spend more gaming time getting the games to actually w
KRIMINAL99
01-02-04, 01:30
I heard AMD and IBM have come together and made some linux machines or were planning on it. I hate Microsoft simply because they keep paying developers to develop games for their XBOX, resulting in games with piddly tiny maps to accomodate the XBOX's minute memory stash. Ive even heard rumours that ID was paid to delay the release of DOOM3 until the XBOX version was finished...
I also don't appreciate my entire history of surfing the internet being hidden in a normally unfindable directory no matter what you do in explorer (but it can be entered if you know its there with a dos box) namely C:\Windows\History\history.ie5\index.dat or content.dat
This is for windows under version 2000 I believe, and acording to some it was a "bug" and has been "fixed" in xp... However I am very skeptical as to what kind of bug would be hiding additional internet history files in a directory that can not normally be seen and CANNOT BE DELETED at all without rebooting to ms-dos... Its much more likely in my opinion that they just found an even better way to hide it in newer versions of windows...
anyways check out this site against microsoft (www.fuckmicrosoft.com) for info on this and a whole lot of other shady stuff that goes on with their products, many of which I've seen are true.
No doubt they are somewhat biased, but seem to concentrate mostly just on things that are undeniably true and alert the reader to the possible implications of such.
This entire debate is stupid. Neither side in this argument is bothering to include references or structure their points in a credible manner. Fuck off and stop your asshattery already, both of you.
Originally posted by Samhain
This entire debate is stupid. Neither side in this argument is bothering to include references or structure their points in a credible manner. Fuck off and stop your asshattery already, both of you. ... WTF ARE U TALKIN ABOUT LEAVE *SMACK BE GONE
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.