What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee's singing debut.
287 Comments
- inactive, on 03/02/2008, -12/+188"If Linux ever achieved a large market share, it would become the target of viruses, much like Windows is now. The question is how to find the perfect balance, so that Linux is widely supported, but not the target of viruses and spyware."
This whole paragraph is just wrong. Buried. Viruses and spyware should be kept away through *design*, not through a reduced user base. At the minute it's safer than Windows in both ways, but even if it had 95% of the user base Linux would still be more secure by design than Windows. - thtroyer, on 03/02/2008, -6/+76Except, you can't protect against stupidity. I completely agree with you... but more often than not, the weakest link is the user, not the OS.
- nizzy1115, on 03/02/2008, -10/+48Fact 1: Using linux does not make you a nerd. Many older people who have never used a pc before find it easier and more intuitive to use.
Fact 2: You do not need to hack your kernel to get your printer to work.
Fact 3: Time spent in initial setup is time saved in longterm maintenance.
Fact 4: Linux is so easy, a cave man could use it. - inactive, on 03/02/2008, -5/+36Agreed. This retarded argument assumes that an operating system's virus count will scale linearly with its user base count, which assumes that each operating system is equally secure. We all know THAT'S not true.
Windows may have dominant market share, but it's not like Linux and OS X have less than 1%. Mac laptops have nearly 20% market share for all laptops. Funny how we have yet to see any real viruses on Macs, while the user base keeps growing. This argument is so old and tired. Windows IS less secure. - leodavinci, on 03/02/2008, -3/+32As for your first point, they do. It is called package management programs that come pre-installed on all major distros. Download Ubuntu, then click Applications --> Add/Remove, search for program of choice, check mark it and hit apply. It will then download and install in one shot.
It is light years beyond what XP/Vista do. - inactive, on 03/02/2008, -8/+37Once critical mass is hit where hardware venders need to support Linux for the market share, it is game over for Windows. Right now Linux is still having to run uphill but after that moment comes there will be an accelerated adoption of Linux. It's quite misleading to claim, as the Linux detractors do, that Windows has better hardware support. Actually it's untrue. Linux supports more hardware. Windows just has the advantage that whenever you buy some piece of hardware, it ships with a CD with windows drivers on it. Imagine if those CDs also had linux drivers. Windows last real advantage would be gone.
- BrainInAJar, on 03/02/2008, -2/+29Make it difficult to do things as root, integrate ZFS and auto-snapshotting ( because then if something ***** up the user's data it's recoverable ) and the user ***** things up matters much less
- kingofpenguins, on 03/02/2008, -7/+32Do you have any idea how absurd both of your comments are? There are hundreds of distros out there because they work for different goals. Just look at each one's description on Distrowatch. Also, most distros would not even *think* about doing mass mergers like that since they are using radically different bases and their whole existence is because they don't like their competition. I dare you to try to tell Archlinux, Slackware, or Gentoo users that they need to merge their distros with Ubuntu.
If you want to have everything centralized, use one of the BSD's. Enough said. - eldridgea, on 03/02/2008, -4/+26FTA: "Any day now the viruses will start to come for the Mac and each day it just gets more and more likely."
Except that OS 9 had about half the market share OS X has now and it had *many* more viruses.
It is not about user base, it is about security and design. - hieveryone, on 03/02/2008, -3/+22I'm looking forward to the day when manufacturers will ship linux drivers and port all their software to linux. Linux is already easy to use, and once drivers and software come out natively for linux, then linux will be insanely easy to use. Drivers and commercial software are the only things that frustrate me about linux. Not the OS's fault, though.
- voyvf, on 03/02/2008, -1/+18.tar.gz is not "Slackware binary"
It's a tarred, gzipped file.
Slackware has a history of using .tgz extensions so that older Windows computers wouldn't vomit when browsing files, yes, but it's still tar and gzip all the way.
That, and it isn't only "noobs" using Ubuntu and Fedora; I'd been using Slackware since '95 when I switched to Ubuntu in 2006. Why? I'm a programmer by trade, and needed to get things running *right now* (if not yesterday) to work on projects. Ubuntu at the time (and likely still) was far more bleeding edge than Slackware, out of the box, and it's uber convenient for setting up development boxes. - inactive, on 03/02/2008, -1/+17I have been using Linux for around 7 years. It has not been an easy road .. but, it has been a great education. I now have control over my system, understanding of how it all works, and sound strategies for the rare, and I mean rare problems. My Fedora based system does everything I want it to, I cringe when I sit in front of an MS box now .. but, I cringe more at the state Windows users computers are in when I am called out to fix them. I have to educate EVERY Windows user I come across.
If more people used Linux:
T'Internet would be a safer place, home computing for the average 'click here' crowd would be WAY less stressful .. and I would be out of a job .. so I'm a little torn! - Stonekeeper, on 03/02/2008, -2/+18This theory is only true if linux had the SAME level of security as windows. If you want to see something that disproves your theory, check out apache Vs IIS vulnerability stats.
- dinostabOMG, on 03/02/2008, -1/+15Not just that, but using GNOME and KDE as the distinguishing factor between distros?
- traherom, on 03/02/2008, -0/+12You can, actually. Google and Ubuntu both have repositories with Earth in it.
- inactive, on 03/02/2008, -6/+18***** off, never heard of CUPS?
- mossblaser, on 03/02/2008, -1/+12Thats a fairly useless argument - you're telling me she installed windows her self using Microsoft's included support, and then found all the drivers she needed for that computer which didn't come with disks... Right...
- thedragon4453, on 03/02/2008, -1/+11Try Ubuntu or PCLinux. I've used Ubuntu, and there isn't much learning curve. The only problem arises when you have a necessary windows only piece of software, or an unsupported piece of hardware. Most of the time you can get both to work, but it will take some time.
- stutimandal, on 03/02/2008, -4/+13To those who think Linux is not intuitive ...
Step 1: The impressive but OK part.
I installed Ubuntu a week ago. I didn't have latex. To check, I typed latex on the "terminal" prompt. The message was "latex not found. You can install latex by typing "sudo ....". I typed the command, and latex was installed in 5 minutes. In windows, one first needs to find package rep, then download exec, then double click, run through setup, and finally re-start.
Step 2: The more impressive part
Within latex, there is a sanskrit package. It has a preprocessor which converts skt files into tex files. I typed skt on terminal to check whether it was installed with my latex installation. I got a message "skt command not found." For running skt, you can download the sanskrit package of Latex (how accurate!) by typing "sudo ...."
Hats off to Free and agile/speedy/user-friendly Linux. - Ellipsys, on 03/02/2008, -2/+11There are many websites that will send you free or low cost CDs of linux distros. Sure, they may not be the bleeding edge packages, but they will install without broadband. As far as support is concerned, some distros have support subscriptions you can pay for. I know Ubuntu does. Red Hat and Mandriva used to have boxed versions that came with a big thick paper user manual and phone support for 90 days, included.
- mrmacky, on 03/02/2008, -0/+9Thats why you design the OS to eliminate as much user error as possible. For example separating root / user account. Requiring authentication for basic administrative function.
In theory, the less power you give the user, the less chance harm will come to them. Administrative function should be kept secure, and separate. - gudnbluts, on 03/02/2008, -1/+10You do know that distros of Linux usually do have a GUI? Ubuntu is very popular now, and as long as your hardware's supported the average user would never need to use the command line.
- kingofpenguins, on 03/02/2008, -1/+10I use BSD too and really like it, but I don't go screaming about how Linux sucks so much. BSD is great, but for a desktop user, sometimes it can be problematic. For instance, many cameras do not work in FreeBSD.
My opinion is that you should try out a BSD (like FreeBSD, or PC-BSD or DesktopBSD if you prefer), but if that does not work out, then use one of the many Linux distributions.. - swab, on 03/02/2008, -0/+9What the hell does an API have to do with hardware support?
- Phocion55, on 03/02/2008, -2/+10There's a way to download files on Windows without being connected to the Internet? Man I guess I really should hop on this Vista boat after all.
- mossblaser, on 03/02/2008, -2/+10Give windows the same support base as linux (so that you are on a level playing field) and you'll soon see that actually linux is a long way ahead - an interface where all apps are 1) consistently themed, 2) consistently designed, 3) massivley customisable, 4) downloaded and installed with one click. You realise that actually windows with its nothing-out-of-the-box attitude really does suck.
- kreatre2007, on 03/03/2008, -2/+10Agreed. Linux and Mac OS X aren't as vulnerable because of their solid UNIX underpinnings -- NOT because of fewer users. I'm sure there are a lot of hackers and people writing viruses that would love to cause widespread havoc amongst Linux and Mac users.
- inactive, on 03/02/2008, -1/+9He's a troll. Don't feed him.
- sloppychris, on 03/02/2008, -1/+9Besides the aforementioned package management there are .deb and .rpm files that install as easily as a .exe.
- mossblaser, on 03/02/2008, -1/+9RPM, DEB and ebuild are piss easy - whats more its 100% consistent - one button to install and thats it! no extra steps no silly logo screens, no silly select a location rubbish, just click install and watch! Or if you use id's products (or some of googles), just run the executable (usually .sh) and it runs *exactly* like an EXE would.
- schoate09, on 03/02/2008, -0/+8I'd rather not use KDE or GNOME, but I'd still like a Linux distro that defaults to a GUI. Then what? What about my fluxbox?
- inactive, on 08/26/2008, -1/+8Why include Linux drivers on a CD? Linux's big advantage in hardware support is that you DON"T NEED the CD. Of course, this isn't always true but once the OSS graphics drivers >= the proprietary graphics drivers and the kernel finally natively supports all major wireless chipsets without ndiswrapper (Read: I said 'all'; I already know it supports 'most'), this may become completely true, at least for the most part.
- dinostabOMG, on 03/02/2008, -1/+8If you still think it's too hard to use Ubuntu to send emails to anyone more savvy than your grandmother, try Linux Mint, which is Ubuntu with all the "nasty things" that are actually already not too difficult.
Also, no one took the Geico joke bait yet? - iceschade, on 03/03/2008, -1/+8Not completely true. If the OS is designed with security in mind, then even if the user is a *****, it will most likely survive. Even if I intentionally write a script that will delete all files and folders to which I have permissions, my Linux box will still run fine. All that will be deleted will be replaceable. It's a simple matter to recreate my home folder from the defaults.
If you wrote a script in Windows to delete all folders and files, chances are you'd be left with a practically unusable machine. - greevar, on 03/02/2008, -0/+7Package management rocks. It just goes to show that just because a corporation is behind it doesn't mean it's the better software.
- cbeach, on 03/02/2008, -7/+14Linux is not "easy" - at least not all the time. Yes, it's pretty straightforward to get a very basic web-browsing, office-suite setup, but the drivers are not there yet. After the delightful live DVD installation, I had to try to get a working kernel build going in order to get Linux to support my wi-fi hardware. At that stage, the whole process became arcane and counter-intuitive. There's a lot of jargon, and a lot of assumed knowledge. I'm a software developer and found Linux a real frustration after the first few hours of hacking around with config. Yes, I know that once you've got the experience, it's easy, but the learning curve is steep. Let's not forget that.
Linux is NOT ready for mass adoption yet, sadly. Pushing it on people will only create more off-putting experiences like my own. Give it time. - mossblaser, on 03/02/2008, -2/+9PEBKAC
Really - if you offer someone free music or ring tones or something they'll enter their password to get them, and once that happens boom, root access. Stealth attacks are near impossible but the stupid stupid attacks will continue. Unfortuantley this is when the OS or computer gets blamed and survival of the fittest becomes a race to dumb things down. - dinostabOMG, on 03/02/2008, -4/+11I think you're perhaps overestimating the public at large. The main thing propping Microsoft up against its competitors is FUD and other marketing. Regardless of how much better the Linux deal is (and it already is much better, IMO), as long as Microsoft can afford to dupe people into sticking with its OSes, it will.
- iceschade, on 03/03/2008, -1/+7Have you ever done a fresh install of Windows XP? If so, you'll know that unless you've got all the drivers for your hardware handy, you're going to spend a LOT of time online searching and downloading and installing drivers you need to get your hardware going. Yes, that includes your wifi drivers. And while it is SOMETIMES more difficult to get your drivers working in Linux, the vast majority of your hardware is supported without having to download things.
Example: I have a 4-year old laptop, with a broadcom-chipset wireless card and nvidia graphics. Not sure what the sound card is, I lost the CD. When I installed Windows on it, my graphics were low-res, the wireless card didn't work, and the sound didn't work. So I had to connect to wired-internet, wait for Windows to configure everything, then get online and search for the nvidia drivers that were supported on my hardware, and then for my wireless and sound drivers too. Upon trying to install my drivers, I discovered that I'd need XP service pack 2 and the .net environment. So I had to update the Windows Update tool, reboot, then update windows, reboot, then install more updates, reboot, then update those updates... And about two hours later I finally was able to install my drivers. After doing that, I had to configure and install antivirus, firewalls, anti-spyware, and Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird and the other applications I use on a daily basis for work and play, including DVD playback and other media capability. The total time it took for me to install Windows and get it configured to taste was, no exaggeration, 5 hours. It took a TON of work and patience. And what if I hadn't been able to get online? I never would have gotten my graphics card or sound card working without access to the internet.
Now, flash to Linux Mint (an Ubuntu derivative).I decided to install Linux Mint on the exact same computer. First, I popped in my LiveCD, let it boot, then double-clicked the Install application. My sound and video cards were automatically detected, and worked. It was a simple matter to fill in the forms as guided by the installer, and then about 20 minutes later I was instructed to reboot. I took the CD out, rebooted, and was in my working Linux environment. Of course, my wireless card didn't work right-off because it was a broadcom-chipset card, and my OS was somewhat out of date. So again, I plugged into the wired internet at my home, and with two clicks and my password, the updating process began. Six minutes later, my computer was up-to-date. The computer also alerted me that I could use proprietary drivers, so I clicked the pop-up, checked-in the two boxes (one for my nvidia card, and one for my broadcom card) and let those install. In another 4 minutes, I had my graphics card and wireless card fully functional. Not to mention the fact that I didn't have to worry about anti-virus or anti-spyware or my firewall... And all of the programs I needed were already installed, including Firefox and Thunderbird and DVD playback and media codecs and everything... The only things I needed to install extra were Skype and Google Earth. So I clicked the "start menu," clicked "Software Portal," clicked "Go to the Software Portal," and then from there (using MintInstall) installed both applications seamlessly. Total install time, from inserting the LiveCD to having my perfectly configured Linux environment: about 1 hour, and hassle-free. Practically everything was point-and-click.
Yes, some aspects of Linux are still challenging to average users, but the same can be said about Windows. Factor in the general stability of Linux and the wide range of packages available with a simple "apt-get install" or click in Synaptic, and the fact that when you update your system, all of your applications are updated automatically and for free as well... I believe that Linux far surpasses Windows any day. - inactive, on 03/03/2008, -2/+8I said "nearly 20% market share", at least quote me correctly. And here's some information.
http://www.macworld.com/article/59616/2007/08/appl ...
Shut the ***** up please. - HaloZero, on 03/03/2008, -1/+7The easiest and most obvious reason for Mac/Linux better design security:
You are not logged in as the administrator at all times in either Linux or Mac. - gudnbluts, on 03/02/2008, -0/+6I suspect he's just out of date. It's exactly the kind of comment I would have made about Redhat four years ago.
- iceschade, on 03/03/2008, -0/+6Ubuntu will ship CDs to you, no need for downloading, free of charge. And if she ever needs tech support, Canonical provides that as well. If she doesn't have internet access, she probably knows someone who does (like you) who can order the ShipIT CDs and who can help her get Canonical's tech support as well.
- ekravchenko, on 03/02/2008, -0/+6the only problem that I have with linux is that I can't run ufile or quick tax on it, also there is no VPN software that works with the setup I have at work. So in reality linux is great, but it lacks software that windows has. P.S. I'm an ubuntu user for around 2 1/2 years
- rmxz, on 03/03/2008, -1/+7If IIS ever attracted the market share that Apache has hackers might start targeting Windows?
If Windows every attracted the market share that Unix/Linux has on mission critical systems (brokerages, banks, etc) hackers might start targeting WIndows?
The windows guys who claim that windows has more viruses because of market share completely fail to realize that Unix and Linux have been on more mission critical computers on the internet ever since the internet was created. - TheZorch, on 03/03/2008, -0/+6Has everyone been taking stupid pills or something? We've been explaining that installing apps in Linux is now easy. How much more easy do you want "put a check and in the box and hit Apply" to ***** be?! And quit bitching about using the Terminal. GUI interfaces have made you all lazy brainless bastards who whine and cry if you gotta learn the simplest text commands. Learning something new is good for you, so stop being whiny bitches and learn something to better yourselves.
- Ellipsys, on 03/02/2008, -1/+7Your journey from noobness begins today! I suggest heading over to www.distrowatch.com and looking for one of the top 10 distros and see what you get a feel for. PCLinuxOS, Xandros, Ubuntu, Fedora, and others are pretty easy to set up and get running. If you really want to just dive in headfirst, I've been told to grab Gentoo, as you'll learn a ton about linux as you install and customize it. Remember though, Gentoo is a project long before its an operating system. Ditto for source-based distros like Arch and Slackware. Linux isn't as scary as some people make it out to be! I'm not a guru by any stretch of the imagination, but with internet based resources and some time I can generally make any distribution work. That said, KNOW YOUR HARDWARE before you start! Make a list, write it down or print it out. Good luck, and don't forget to check out the forums and IRC of your chosen distro!
- sloppychris, on 03/02/2008, -2/+8I agree. It's scary how easy linux will be with support from more hardware vendors.
- thomas, on 03/02/2008, -0/+6The article was good up until the part he said he wanted to limit Linux market share to avoid being targeted by virus writers. That is just plain stupid and I don't even care if Linux succeeds or not.
- vibrokatana, on 03/02/2008, -1/+7Sadly people forget how unintuitive windows is at times. Probably the only thing that comes close to out of the box usability is OSX, but that is because the drivers are bundled with the OS. Linux (and various other BSD variants) come pretty close, but some hardware is simply unsupported.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 287 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is