What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
87 Comments
- ClOlD, on 10/10/2007, -2/+23"The standard SYSTEM account is like an “agent” from the Wachowski brothers’ Matrix trilogy"
Er... make that "Wachowski SIBLINGS". - cquinnd, on 10/10/2007, -2/+22Microsoft already made the Windows Kernel secure long ago. It was the rest of the OS that had access to the kernel that was causing the majority of the security problems.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+19Actually, it was completely the fact that MS still makes their OSs backwards compatible that has screwed them up so much.
Get rid of that ability to run 15 year old programs and you'd kiss goodbye 90% of the issues and security concerns overnight.
Apple did the right thing by basically ditching inbuilt compatibility with older apps, and their OS is less vulnerable (apart from the security via obscurity thing). Its a pity that MS can't do that however, not if it wants to keep its corporate users happy.
Apple were able to do it because they had (and still have) only a very very small market share. Less than 4% worldwide. - michuk, on 10/10/2007, -4/+21Agree with the user/kernel mode -- it's a mistake. Concerning the drivers it all depends on the way of viewing it. Drivers are the mens of communication between the hardware and the kernel, thus they can be put in between.
- FyberOptic, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14He wasn't rude in any way, and was rather informative. I don't know how else you expected him to say it. I dug you down for being an idiot. Let that be a lesson.
- MioTheGreat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11To be fair, the article did state that it's going to mostly be about XP. It doesn't include any of the changes to Vista (For instance, the bootup process has been altered, and things were moved in and out of the kernel, like the vast majority of DirectX, the audio layer, etc., new process isolation stuff that didn't exist before that DRASTICALLY improves security...)
- ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -9/+19Although he simplified the "what are the fundamental differences between Linux and Windows?" question a lot, it's still a complex article. The article is very objective, but may not seem that way to anyone who hasn't heard about the huge difference in quality of the programming behind Linux and Windows.
Also, if Windows made their kernel secure instead of leaving it out in the open "deaf and blind", antivirus vendors would lose business. And that's really what everything attached to a Windows system is about; making money. - nedzeve, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9"largely different"? Not really. Superficially, different distros may appear different. But they have far more in common with eachother than say, BSD or Solaris -- which are quite different. Compared to Windows, however, all *Nix are more or less dramatically different.
- retawd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Wow! This is the perfect Digg thread. It begins technical, gets stupid, and ends when someone declares himself God!
- Jexie, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10There was no point, he attacks the messenger but backs it up with....absolutely nothing! Maybe you could lobby the site to change its name to polishlinuxwindows.org! this would then suddenly make the same article unbiased according to his logic.
- 21chrisp, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9I'm sure MacWorld will publish a comparison of Linux and Windows architectures sometime soon...
- rootstyle, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Sigh... the increasingly common misconception that Linux distros are fundamentally different under the hood... (especially bad in a discussion about architecture, i.e. the kernel)
- atdigg, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim."
- Illidan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5This isn't talking about a Linux distribution. Instead, it is referring to the "vanilla" or straight kernel, which most distributions use directly (and with minor changes for many of the rest).
- stugatz, on 10/10/2007, -7/+12That's one way to look at it, but I prefer to read an article about windows v. linux coming from a linux website than the same article coming from a windows biased site.
Minor inaccuracies aside it looks to me like the start of a very lively discussion that could benefit the users of both communities. - Reziarfg, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7Dugg up for pointing out that drivers are the mens of communication.
- grumpyrain, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Whinge about it all you like, at least it is not about iPhone / iPod. Seriously, 9 of the top 10 in technology at the moment are about the new iPod. Seriously, I don't want to block Apple stories because I do like to keep up, but this is crazy.
- TheZorch, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8I hardly EVER browse the web on Windows anymore. I use Linux, simply because a majority of the worms/viruses spreading today can "only" exploit a Windows environment. This is also why Mac users are safe from most Windows-only exploits. Not to say there aren't any Linux virus ir Mac viruses, but they are EXTREMELY rare. Linux has its own share of problems too, no OS is 100% perfect, but they are fewer than those plaguing Windows. Also, the latest new distros like ubuntu, Knoppix, and Slax have made considerable improvements.
Judging an OS on its ability to run Windows apps isn't anywhere close to a fair accessment of an OS. Its the over stability, ease of use, and versitility of that OS which should be judged. Linux, Unix and BSD based OSes have always been consider far more stable and versatile than Windows by the IT community. They make better servers and mission-critical systems. Getting Linux into the home requires a good, easy to use distro like say Ubuntu, and an un-biased, plain-English comparison to educate users. Most won't care as long as they can still get their email, visit MySpace and watch Youtube videos, which can be done on Linux easily so they'll likely switch in time. Then you got your hardcore gamers and power users. For gamers the only real option is Transgaming's "Cedega" software for running Windows games on Linux (they made the software "Cedar" which EA uses for their Mac games), or find Linux versions of their favorite games. That list is starting to grow. Power users and business users will be more likely to switch. For them it stops being an issue of how much software works on it and becomes an issue of how much more freedom does it give me to do my job? In that arena Linux can win over Windows hands down. - Vorsuc, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The problem is that even an 'easy' distro like Ubuntu is still a long way off being accessible to the vast majority of users who currently run windows. I'm an Ubuntu evangalist, happily throwing out CDs to friends family and co-workers, most of whom adore Ubuntu right up until they have issues and start having to use the terminal. The only ones who tend to stick with it are fellow developers, the people used to 'fighting' with technology and exploring, sadly that's not the mindset of the typical user and is going to continue to be the reason why linux falters in the home market.
Once you secure up Windows, many of the virus/malware issues go away. The rest are down to clicking links on emails or downloading screensavers so that you end up running some random 3rd party executable, which is always going to be a problem no MATTER the OS. The problem isn't so much in securing the OS, but teaching users better safety and awareness.
If your users are happy enough to run unknown executables on their machine without forethought, it doesn't really matter which OS they are running, the chimps will manage to trash it. - zhulien, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6I know this is a comparison of Windows and Linux but... whether security is good or not or even 'wanted' by the user is an opinion within this article. Chuck in some other OSs into the article and the whole security comparison goes out the Window ;D ie: Compare Linux to AmigaOS or AMSDOS - hmmm, if AMSDOS is what the user wants (ie: it has no concept of networking or multiuser and is on ROM) then that isn't necessarily bad, actually it's more secure than Linux right? You need to walk up to the machine, stick a floppy in, figure out the obscure commands to run something and what happens? not much bad, the worst thing is perhaps a crash and you need to reset... which is instantly cause the OS is on ROM.
- majortom1981, on 10/10/2007, -13/+17I refuse to look at a windows vs linux article if it comes from a windows or linux website. The minute i saw the link I refused to look at it. I am not dissing windows or linux. I rather read a good non biased article.
- michuk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Part II will cover the registry.
- CarzorStelatis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3'Linux' is used by everyone except FSF zealots to refer to both the operating system and the kernel. See for examples: Ubuntu Linux, SuSE Linux, Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
- dkoon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Hmmmm, have you ever think about that it was the user who excuted the virus? so with your analogy would you go to the store and ask for a refund when you accidentally broke your machine? or ask for your car deal for a refund when someone broke into your car and steall all your stuff?
- GyroTech, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3It's Minix, not Minux and Linux is not a recursive acronym. It's not an acronym at all, hence no need for ALL-CAPS when spelling it.
- sp1nm0nkey, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Whether the kernel or driver is on top is semantics... they're really just one big ball of code that's loaded high or in a different address space, but I'd put drivers on top simply because the kernel supports the driver API that the drivers call into, the kernel only calls into really really low level drivers for stuff it needs to do or display or whatever. Kernel and Userspace are transposed. Also, and this is in a lot of places, mach as implemented in OS X/XNU is _not_ a microkernel. It just does the VM and message passing, http://fxr.watson.org/fxr/source/osfmk/?v=xnu-792.6.70 is the mach portion, http://fxr.watson.org/fxr/source/bsd/?v=xnu-792.6.70 is the BSD portion, and iokit (drivers) sit on top of all of that, for example.
- gazzerh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3This is very good article. Well written. It's too short though. It doesn't cover what i was expecting. I was expecting an in depth look into the differences of architecture between the two operating systems (and there are many advantages to each) but he didn't visit them.
The blogger should label this a work in progress and amend at the earliest opportunity.
He's spot on with his assumptions though :) - rodii, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Oh, I see... never mind. Who'd have thought it?
- MioTheGreat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"I don't regret the registry was developed; It's unfortunate that the registry was overused"
It's a good answer. The registry serves an important purpose -- It provides a very fast database for simple app settings (HKCUSoftware) and registered components. - mik3pass, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3It's a start in the right direction.
- bluepass, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2You'd be surprised to know that I've heard someone say that before!
"You use Linux? Why? That's like a free, old version of Windows!" - Jexie, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Ah, but do not point out any actual ways in which is is not a fair comparison! If the URL suddenly had 'windows' somewhere in it would the exact same article magically become biased toward windows? if it mentioned neither would it become unbiased? Your hint is quite vague.
- Amablue, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2It is not the author’s intention to rekindle another flame war between Windows and Linux users. The author asks both sides interested in this topic to refrain from darting names onto each other. If one feels necessity to comment the article, please write “it is bad or not”, or point where it should be rewritten in a broader perspective - what doesn’t mean it should show superiority of one of the systems over the other. Such a statement would be highly subjective. And when I reckon Windows’ architecture inferior to Linux one, it doesn’t mean it is inferior. They differ. Writing operating system is a complex matter and too many times the chosen solution is so called “a solution of lesser evil”. One is able to write a similar “list” of architectural items pertaining to Linux systems, but it would have nothing to do with Photoshop running or not on every of the two systems.
- michuk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2http://www.nuxified.org/topic/help_needed_in_proof_reading_articles
Wanna help? :) - Izzie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2as long your windows box is behind a properly configured linux firewall/router you'll be ok
- arjie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Yeah, but with all that stuff in the Matrix, Larry/Lana must have thought he/she could just hit the undo.
- nedzeve, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3No. It's: "The 1990's called. They want their Windows vs. Linux debate back."
- GaiaAP, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Source: polishlinux.org. You guessed right :)
- bilangew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21. Joe User's PC is being very slow, he thinks it's now time to start from scratch and use its Windows XP pre-SP1 ghost Image that its PC vendor provided when he bought his PC.
2. Backup his data, and install with mentioned Image CD.
3. Go on the net, behind a firewall or not.
4. ???
5. Be a total loser!! Bonus points if Joe user wasn't behind a firewall, because he wouldn't have enough time to get to point #4 before some worm gets him.
That scenario is quite common. As another digg user said, you just called millions or users "losers". - Tenoq, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The boot-up process for Vista still follows the same principles - the login screen is still displayed half-way through the system loading procedure. If anything, they've increased the boot time* in Vista without an significant improvements in method.
*On most default configurations. Some PCs _can_ boot quicker, but the majority do not. - MioTheGreat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You are correct. That job belongs to winlogon, which in turn under Server 2003 called GINA, or under Vista, initializes various Credential Providers. (Though, smss is the process that starts winlogon.)
- andycr512, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1An analogy I like using is that Windows is pre-baked, boxed cookies from a major company, and Linux is hand-made cookies from your grandmother.
Windows exists to earn Microsoft a profit. The cookies are produced on an assembly line. The best ingredients aren't used - the ingredients which are the cheapest which don't lose them sales are used. The cookies are put in shiny boxes and crammed on supermarket shelves.
Linux exists because the people who made it wanted to use it. They used the best ingredients because they had all the time in the world and cost wasn't an issue since they didn't expect to make any money anyway. The cookies taste much better than any boxed cookies, but sometimes granny hands you the dough and you have to bake them yourself, which is more work than opening a box and snacking. - andycr512, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I've had it hibernate and suspend a laptop I used to use and not fail -once-.
Wish I still used that laptop, actually. My current one is much less ACPI standards-compliant. - yunus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Think about it like a car. You expect the manufacturer to take car of the problems that happen due to workmanship or part failure. But you put gas in the car. Sure you expect it to not require perfect gas, there are impurities but you also dont expect it to include a filter for sugar. I see a virus as being like that, something you put on your machine.
- Meep3D, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Vista does what any sensible laptop owner did years ago. It simply hibernates the system when the power button is pressed rather than doing a true startup/shutdown - drastically improving the speed of everything.
I would say that Linux should adopt this method, but considering I've never seen it successfully hibernate a machine with any degree of reliability I don't see it happening. - andrewtheart, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You do realize that you've just called millions and millions of people "total losers", including countless IT professionals who know exactly what they're doing in the Windows OS environment? You don't have to be stupid to get a virus in Windows... It does all the work for you, behind your back, and without your knowledge. Anybody could get infected.. and not everybody is a loser. Get a clue.
- dwhitbeck, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3The author doesn't say much about the Windows registry, one of the most fundamentally flawed aspects of WIndows.
- badassninja, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1LOL. put down the crack pipe.
- smek2, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And i dugg YOU down for being a complete idiot! I mean, seriously, what the heck are you talking about? cornflakepirate just pointed out a mistake. A real mistake in an article which claims to be a fair comparison of two OS
- andrewtheart, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2You do realize that you've just called millions and millions of people "total losers", including countless IT professionals who know exactly what they're doing in the Windows OS environment?
You don't have to be stupid to get a virus in Windows... It does all the work for you, behind your back, and without your knowledge. Anybody could get infected.. and not everybody is a loser.
Windows fanboys are amazingly naive. -
Show 51 - 87 of 87 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is