Linked by Adam S on Wed 25th Sep 2002 02:21 UTC
The Linux community has been buzzing about LindowsOS since its original announcement over a year ago. With Michael Robertson, founder of mp3.com, at the helm, it was heralded as a Linux that could seamlessly run all of your Windows applications. As details became available, the skepticism of the community grew and with the LindowsOS general release only months away, no one is quite sure what to make of Lindows.com and their product, LindowsOS. We tested Lindows 2.0 and we today present the most in-depth review ever written for this much-talked OS, accompanied by a number of shots.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Yama Security isn't just a private matter. IMHO, people are obligated to have a secure system. Why? Because r00t3d systems are more-often-than-not used in DDoS attacks against other systems.
Darius You just don't get it. If it's going to take decisions like these (default root accounts), it's not worth it. What good is world domination if it results in exponentially increasing the levels of insecurity (DDoS, worms, etc) in the process? Choices like this play right into the hands of competitors(?) like Microsoft. While they're busy advancing their systems (yes, XP is a good move forward, like it or not), you've got Lindows.com designing their OS to resemble the inadequate security policies of Windows 9x. Grrr. Come on people, think!
Ranger rick So when you run evolution and read your e-mail, any old thing that you get from the net can be run as root. When you download things from the web you're running it as root. You should not run everything as root because you can't trust everything else you get from the net, not because you can't trust yourself.
Yama, Darius, Ranger-
Why Unix at all? Unix was designed as a low security operating system and over the last 20 years has done a great deal of work to increase security on it. Even today making a Unix box secure and useful is hard. Why not use operating systems that are out of the box much more secure:
VMS, i-os, z-os or if you want to save money on hardware Eros (which runs fine on a 386).
If you care about security that much why advocate an operating system in which security was an after thought? For a true desktop system that doesn't have servers installed breaking security is fairly hard. There is no FTP, no telnet, no sshd, no sendmail... Maybe you can take over the box by convincing the user to download some software; but then you could take over any unix box the same way. The only operating systems that will hold up against tricking the administrator are the ones running capability systems like the above.
Ignorant users are going to sue boxes and the best place to limit their damage is at the ISP / router level where we have pros in place.