http://www.osnews.com/story/1803/A_Deeper_Look_Into_LindowsOS_2_0 Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2012, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Wed, 15 Feb 2012 11:19:42 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? If you want to be r00ted, why not use Windows?

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. Often a cracker will commandeer hundreds or even thousands of systems and direct them all to attack one target. The vast majority of these systems are home Windows boxes, since they are so easy to 0wn. If all home systems shipped as "secure by default", then it would be immensely more difficult for k!dDi3z to 0wN machines and attack other systems.

The Internet is like an ecosystem. Everything can be affected by anything (for the most part), so we all need to work together to keep it running smoothly. A more community-minded approach is required. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 02:49:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? ok you complain about not being able to browse shares... but then give an example of a share that would be hidden
"\WORKGROUPCOMPUTERNAMEC$DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGSADMINISTRATORDESKTOP"

of course you cant browse hidden shares silly Wed, 25 Sep 2002 02:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? > If you want to be r00ted, why not use Windows?

There is no reason why not. But Lindows is an alternative to Windows, not to Linux. Which means, that it counts on picking up the habits people have from the Windows world, simply because their customers will be Windows users. Even if these habits are not really very good...
I guess this is a decision that Lindows people took a long time ago. It has its good marketing point (towards the windows users), and it has its bad practical point (towards the clueful people). Wed, 25 Sep 2002 03:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Good point, Ophidian, but I knew that. C$ is a default share on all Windows NTFS machines. I couldn't browse legitimate shares, so I just entered a path I KNEW existed. There are real shares on my drive - those are the ones I couldn't get to. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 03:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? "One of my concerns with using any distribution is that Linux is so volatile, I am afraid I'll be caught using one that I soon find unsupported or abandoned. There's a professional feel to LindowsOS that makes you confident that it's not going anywhere for awhile."

I read this and just laughed and laughed. Linux is a volatile as you want it to be. There are plently of Redhat 6.2(an old distro geekspeak) installs out there and they ARE STILL supported by Redhat and many other vendors like Oracle, IBM, HP, Dell etc. The same could be said for any of the older releases by Debian or Mandrake etc. If you had a clue, Lindows would be the vendor to worry about. Lindows is king of PR stunts and false promises. It is in fact an embarassment to the linux community.

If you want a good linux desktop distro, use Lycoris or the upcoming Redhat 8.0 which will be out soon.

Lindows is a Johnny come lately who won't be around for the long haul and in the end will add nothing to the linux community.

The only reason Lindows even got any publicity in the first place is they said you'd be able to run windows apps. Now they've backed away after getting their share of free PR.

Please people if your going to spend your hard earned money buy something else. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 03:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? >If you want a good linux desktop distro, use Lycoris

We reviewed Lycoris a week ago. Check our archives. Lycoris is not "there yet" either.

>Lindows is a Johnny come lately who won't be around for the long haul

Your opinion. IMO, Lindows has the same chances (if not more) than Lycoris and Xandros. In fact, there are parts of the OS that Lycoris is ahead, and there are other parts that Lindows is ahead instead.

To understand and appreciate that, you should not be thinking as a Linux fanboy. You should think as their target market: Joe User.

>and in the end will add nothing to the linux community.

Lindows was never here to add to the Linux community. It is here to make money. It is a company, it has employees and they have a product that might interest some Windows users. End of story. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 03:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? The main point of "don't run as root!" was missing from this article. Sure, logging in as root and using the system regularly is bad and should be avoided, but it's not *that* serious. The real problem is not "ooh! I accidentally deleted something!" The real problem is, once you're running as root, all of your inputs run as root too...

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. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 03:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I was running as root for a grand total of about three hours with Lindows. I've been using it for about three days.

As the screenshots show, I added a user and I've been logged in as a regular user since that time. In fact, as we speak I'm on Lindows 2.0 as a regular user. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 03:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? There is no reason why not. But Lindows is an alternative to Windows, not to Linux. Which means, that it counts on picking up the habits people have from the Windows world, simply because their customers will be Windows users. Even if these habits are not really very good...

That's a terrible excuse for poor computing practices. Just like Yama says, the Internet is like an ecosystem. I don't care who this product is targeted towards, that doesn't give distributors the right to jeopardize something as precious as the Internet by advocating irresponsible behavior. If running as a "normal" user isn't good enough for the converted masses, let them stay with Windows. This is larger than you, me, Windows users or Michael Robertson. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with Linux diluting parts of itself to allow new recruits... it just shouldn't come at the cost of everyone else's enjoyment.

If I sound like an alarmist, so be it. Modern operating systems should promote good computing habits. This is a joke.

-fp Wed, 25 Sep 2002 03:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? i agree FULLY with Yama and fuzzyping but would also like to add...

okay, why not teach new users the need for security EARLY, something they were not taught with Windows, and save them the trouble later. Sooner or later viruii(???plural virus) will be written for linux, it will only be a matter of time!

you don't want to be running evolution or kmail or pine for that matter and download a virus and hose your whole system...and you won't if you are running as a normal user!

good security isn't something to be ignored by lazy people...it is something that they should LEARN

that alone is part of the problem...people aren't willing to learn! if you don't want to learn anything new, DON'T SWITCH YOUR OS!!!! I don't make the OS change into something that IT IS NOT!

Give me Mandrake 9! Wed, 25 Sep 2002 04:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? "Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with Linux diluting parts of itself to allow new recruits... it just shouldn't come at the cost of everyone else's enjoyment. "

In order to allow new recruits on a large scale (as so many of the zealots seem to want), Linux will have to dilute itself to the point where it inherits the same characteristics (and problems) as Windows, as you will have to cater to the needs of those users.
Fact is, what users (and I mean Joe Consumer) do on Windows, so they will do on Linux, and part of this means doing stupid shit like opening attachments when they have no idea what it is. This means that not only will Linux not be free and open once The Corporation gets through with it, it won't be secure either once the average Windows user gets through with it. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 04:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Finally - someone who gets it! I've been using Linux since the pre-1.x kernel days and I've been waiting for something like Lindows since then. I replaced my beloved SuSE with Lindows because it gives me what I want on my desktop - a clean, simple and easy to use tool.

For those who want to go beyond, you can always drop to a command line and do what you wish. I had to do this (using apt-get and alien) to get Acrobat Reader, Xzgv and a couple other "essential" tools that I always use on a Linux distro. I also had to do some fiddling to get my wireless card to work and to get RealPlayer to play nice with Netscape. But for the "average Joe" user, Lindows does what it sets out to do and very well.

Thanks for the rational look. There is way too much hysteria in the Linux world and a good dose of reason now and then is A Good Thing!

Don Wed, 25 Sep 2002 04:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? "okay, why not teach new users the need for security EARLY, something they were not taught with Windows, and save them the trouble later. Sooner or later viruii(???plural virus) will be written for linux, it will only be a matter of time!"

So, who's going to teach them? Are you going to volunteer your time in order to go to somebody's house at 7pm (when they get off of work) and teach a single mom with 3 kids how to do secure computing? Hell, maybe you should start up a non-profit organization or something.

"that alone is part of the problem...people aren't willing to learn! if you don't want to learn anything new, DON'T SWITCH YOUR OS!!!! I don't make the OS change into something that IT IS NOT!"

You're right, people aren't willing to learn. So, with an OS, you've got a choice to make. Either dumb it down to the point where an ape can use it (and therefore break it), or else they'll stick with what they have. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 04:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? In order to allow new recruits on a large scale (as so many of the zealots seem to want), Linux will have to dilute itself to the point where it inherits the same characteristics (and problems) as Windows, as you will have to cater to the needs of those users.

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!

-fp Wed, 25 Sep 2002 04:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Sorry to change the subject, but why does Wine work so poorly in LindowsOS, if it is based on Debian?

I am running Debian 3.0 (woody?) with a stock apt-get install of Wine, and I can run all of the apps in Office 2000 off my second hard drive with Windows 2000 on it without any serious problems.

And notepad doesn't even work in LindowsOS?
What did they do to mess that up?

-cc Wed, 25 Sep 2002 04:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Thank you Adam for your great article. I had just gotten Lindows 2.0 set up and the first thing I see is your article :-)

I've been trying them all for Joe User - Lycoris, ELX, etc. Lindows has befuddled me because of their shifting definition of what it is. It seems they have settled on that now, at least. Despite using Lindows, I've been wary of it because I have not been too sure of what they're doing. I have to admit though, they are delivering an alternative to Windows for the average consumer. Your thorough review of its good and not-so-good points do not bear rehashing on my part. So, I have only a couple of remarks to make.

Some of the Linux users cannot surpress themselves from bashing Lindows, no matter how often it is emphasized that this is not their Linux. Most cannot or will not try and view these type of distros as Joe User would. Lindows 2.0 has achieved a very organized and attractive look and feel. C-R works extremely well. It is far from being a "disgrace".

Security - this is an issue to me. I cannot imagine that Lindows has come this far and will continue without addressing this in some way. Lycoris has a great feature in its Control Center where you are asked if you would like to turn the firewall on - yes or no. It's so easy, I can't imagine Lindows will not come up with something of this nature.

My only big criticism of Lindows (unless they've changed this) is that if you buy a Microtel PC at Wal-Mart with Lindows, there is no Lindows documentation, not even a little 20 page manual like Lycoris has. it would not be difficult at all to put together a small manual explaining in very simple terms how things basically work, why you might want to create users and to warn against the typical things that newbies do. Again, unless the situation has changed, I don't understand why they don't have something like that. It would be of great help to the Windows users they're trying to attract.

Thanks again Adam for another great article! Wed, 25 Sep 2002 05:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? 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. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 05:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? >If it's going to take decisions like these (default root accounts), it's not worth it.

Exactly!

Linux != Windows
Linux dosn't have to look exactly like windows for it to be easy or for people to use it...people don't switch to the Mac platform and boot up and expect to see windows...

People have been too diluted into thinking windows is THE only way to do things.

I will give Lindows.com this...i am glad to see they have decided to go with the normal KDE look instead of raping it to look like win98 like Xandros and Lycoris do, which is just completely stupid!!!

How do you teach new users security and the differences between windows/mac/linux....

DOCUMENTATION, user forums, easy to read and follow How-To's and tutorials! (and it dosn't hurt to have a friend)

I will admit this is one area ALL linux distro's need work on. But like i said...Linux shouldn't be turned into the mistake that was win95/98....(yes XP is step in the right direction as stated above)

If you aren't willing to Learn a NEW operating system DON'T

it's that easy, that's the joy of a freedom and competition there will always be other choices out there...

don't like windows but you aren't willing to learn the differences between windows and a Mac/Linux/BeOS...then stick with windows and stop complaining! Wed, 25 Sep 2002 05:11:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? don't like Lindows and are not willing to accepts its differences from Mandrake/Red Hat/ SuSE...then stick with your distro and stop complaining!

Yep, sounds just as pathetic when I say it.

Vince

>>don't like windows but you aren't willing to learn the differences between windows and a Mac/Linux/ BeOS...then stick with windows and stop complaining! Wed, 25 Sep 2002 06:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? In addition, not many people have mentioned that although the root user is created and used by default, you are certainly capable of creating and modifying users. LindowsOS is Debian underneath it all and it fully supports permissions and profiles. As seen below, adding a user is a simple process and assigning permissions can be done with a right click in the GUI or the chmod command at the prompt. Will most people know how to do this? No. But I'd ask - do most people want to?

Okay, firstly notice that you have to use command line to make a new user, something you DON'T have to do with Windows. Microsoft have been touting multiuser computers since the dawn of Windows 95. In fact, it is hyped a lot with Windows XP.

What is needed is something that isn't fully root as the default user account. That means the user CAN'T delete any system files. Why you ask? It is after all hidden by the file manager - what about viruses? Lindows, if it gets famous, would be a big virus target.

Users don't WANT to be root. They want to just on their computer and install apps via CNR or run some apps. You DON'T need full root permission for that.

So, it is quite ironic that while Windows and Mac OS X is pushing "Don't Run as Root", Lindows pushes "Run as Root" :-)

Now, about the look and UI:

The LindowsOS desktop is not radical. It's KDE, plain and simple. It's got a kicker with custom icons, a desktop with useful icons, and a super logical menu.

The menu structure is only something thing to shout about. When Mac OS X and Windows XP tries to get rid of desktop icons, why does Lindows push them on the desktop? :-) As for the icons, most of it is Crystal. It is in fact a modified Crystal theme, probably to follow the Aqua-ish look, which brings me to my next point:

LindowsOS uses the Keramik theme by default, which is gorgeous.

Actually, it is a modified Keramik theme. Notice the titlebar, for example, uses a Aqua-like button? Speaking of Aqua, what is Lindows' fetish with Aqua? People connect Aqua-looking things with Apple. And for Lindows, that is damaging. As a current almost-full time Windows user, this pass them off as completely unprofessional. How about making a look for themselves?

I find the KDE defaults to be generally unattractive and tough to use.

For unattractive, KDE is using Keramik and Crystal for KDE 3.1, and it looks more gorgeous than Lindows, no offence Michael :-) As for tough to use, Lindow modified KDE a little bit, what it exceled in was the distribution part (like the menu structure), not KDE's part.

Besides, remember once Windows used single click? I happen to use that Windows (Windows 98?) before switching to Linux with KDE 1, and until now I can't get myself to use double clicking. :-) Wed, 25 Sep 2002 06:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Before you turn against me like a menacing wounded tiger that just gave birth, I have used Lindows 1.1, just not 2.0. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 06:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? "If a new distro can't view Office XP documents semi-reliably and Office 2000 documents pretty close to the originals, it's lacking."

I think you just described OpenOffice there !

Personally, I've *never* seen any other OS Office product display my MS Office Word or Excel files like MS Office. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 06:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Great article. Thx.

My point is simple..yeah, it's definitely worth $99/year.

My rule of thumb is that if I haven't contributed to the code, I might as well contribute with my money. And, for 20 cents a day, that's a great deal in my book. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 07:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? "Sooner or later viruii(???plural virus) will be written for linux, it will only be
a matter of time! "

The plural of Virus is Viruses.

It is _not_ a second declension Latin noun like Annus. If anything, it
is fourth declension, but it is not a word that was normally used in
Roman times and AFAIK there is no example in classical texts of Virus
being used in the plural.

So it should be treated as an English word, like many others derived
from ancient languages. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 07:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I wish people who don't have a clue wouldn't use security in their arguments.

First of all there is a probability of risk. A user running as root is more likley to trash their own file system than get hacked.

Linux email clients do not execute attachments. If I run as root you don't have some greater advantage sending email viruses to me. It doesn't matter. Email is not a Linux virus vector.

You can compromise a non root account and setup a DDOS server anyway. If you run the DDOS program it doesn't really matter what user you are.

Most linux attacks occur as a hole in a service such as ssh, apache, dns etc. These are not rooted because the main user is running as root.

Running as root does not imply the user will be hacked or even is more susceptible to hacks. Running as root changes the amount of damage a user can do to the entire system when running a stray app. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 08:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? That Keramik default button looks like crap. I don't know about you, but for me that much of a gap between parts on a physical item usually indicates shoddy workmanship. Either that or somebody mashed on the button one too many times and now it is stuck in the pressed-in position.

As for all of this "won't someone please think of the system files !?!" whining: what about my personal files? Screw the system files. I can get those off of the CD or from CNR. It is the files _I_ created that are important to me.

Maybe app devs shouldn't write crappy software that lets arbitrary binaries run or copy to arbitrary locations on my system (after all, everyone always gets their feathers in a bunch when MS does it). And maybe I should be smarter than to run a random binary some loser might send me (too much to hope for sadly, but makes for a good life lesson).

That said, I could see benefit to protecting the core system and firewall parts via password (no mention of "root user", that's an implementation detail).

On the recommendation to include the GIMP: Go ahead, if you want to scar your users for life (well, maybe not _life_

Random question:
Can you type something like c:foobar (or c:/foo/bar) in a file open dialog and have it work? Wed, 25 Sep 2002 08:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I mean does for example TT fonts work propely, I have seen few Linux distros work in the real world without alot of work from my side. Can I as a desktop user now just install Lindows and Staroffice and use my TT fonts and have it look good??? Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:01:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I set up an account on my Debian box for my four year old daughter, who uses the "Penguin Computer" for things like TuxRacer, TuxPaint, TuxTyping, and other Debian-Junior type stuff. For convenience, I configured kdm to let her log in without a password. I don't know why, but she won't hear of it. "Daddddddy - I want a password!". So now she learns to enter her user name and password. I would agree that the "run as root" idea deserves to be buried, even if Lindows is going after Windows users. Just because "everyone does it" doesn't mean it isn't a stupid idea.

p.s. it is really a scream to hear a four year old yell out "K-D-E" as she logs onto the computer.

p.p.s. if BeOS had really caught on, the single-user, run-as-root paradigm would have become a big problem, although Be apparently had plans to make BeOS multi-user and (more) secure in the future roadmap before the company went under. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? "if BeOS had really caught on, the single-user, run-as-root paradigm would have become a big problem"

I just mean that it would have been a weakness for BeOS. It wouldn't have been more of a problem than a gazillion people running Win95/98. I doubt it would have changed the fate of the company, but I always thought it was a mistake that BeOS wasn't secure and multi-user. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? You probably configured wine to use your C: partition, where all the needed dlls and stuff resides. Lindows has it own C: so that stuff just isnt there. ( For me to poop on ) Wed, 25 Sep 2002 09:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Detailed Description and Comparisons with Other Programs

We wanted to let LindowsOS users in on the development of the AOL 7.0
client running on LindowsOS. Please note that this product is
continually being developed under LindowsOS and does not provide 100%
functionality. If you are an existing AOL user, Click-N-Run AOL for a
sneak preview of our progress so far! If you'd like to sign up for an
AOL account, simply visit www.aol.com.

AOL is known for providing the most convenient and easiest-to-use
interactive service available. The Company pioneered technologies
such as Keywords for simple navigation and the Buddy List feature to
enable instant messaging by displaying members' contacts who are
online.

The flagship service offers members a complete package of online
features including the popular My Calendar to organize busy
schedules, You've Got Pictures to view and share family photos
online, Radio@AOL, a built-in radio offering more than 100 stations
of quality music; a built-in multimedia player to enjoy the Web's
growing trove of rich audio and video; more local content on the
Welcome Screen, and much more. The service can be accessed using any
high-speed connection or by dial-up connections from virtually
anywhere in the world.

AOL also has led the way in protecting members' online privacy and
security. The service's built-in Parental Controls offers the best
available tools for parents to protect their children from
inappropriate online content, choose from whom they may or may not
receive e-mail, and even limit the amount of time children spend
online. Our privacy protections set a gold standard in the industry
and give online shoppers the highest degree of protection for their
credit cards and personal information. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 11:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Re-read jbolden1517's post and stop being so bigoted !
You want "S-E-C-U-R-I-T-Y" ??? Disconnect from the network and you'll have maximum security !
Not enough ? Why do you bother with xNIX then ? Go VMS the most secure OS ever made (non including "OSs" with no network layer ofcourse).

Unless you run any servers and listeners(unlike M$ OS) nobody should be able to touch your computer.
I'd like to see the script kiddie that hacks my Win2k. Yes, I have a software firewall, no I don't return pings and yes, all my incoming ports are closed.

People who use their computers for browsing, e-mailing and word processing with a game once in a while don't give a damn about security and all your bigoted zealot ideas. Get off that (virtual) tree and check your real home security for once before some real life script kiddie (aka burglar) will hack to your home and 0wn your beloved 3133t box.

No, he won't bother with your silly passwords to see your porn, he'll boot from a CD and format the shit out of your system. Thn he'll sell it and use the money to date a girl and get some REAL porn.

What a bunch of losers !


p.s.

a. Whether your like it or not, BeOS was a great single user OS and for multimedia you DON'T need multiusers and 'security'.

b. Lindows are doing the right thing by bringing more normal people to the Linux world to replace some of you inbred bigoted zealots. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 11:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Let me note that while I'm against running as root, I understand the compromises they're making by doing it and in most cases have no problems with them. However,

jbolden1517 says: 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.


I have no issue with most of the compromises they make to make the system more usable to the average user. The problem is, the reason people will move to Lindows from Windows is to get away from the rampant problems that MS has, with crashing and with security. Why switch to Lindows at all if Lindows dumbs itself down enough that it's just as susceptible to problems? It'll still be a bit more stable, but 2000 or XP with good hardware (and trusted drivers) is stable enough. On UNIX systems, *even if* they trick the user into doing something, it can only mess up their sandbox.

Richard says: Linux email clients do not execute attachments. If I run as root you don't have some greater advantage sending email viruses to me. It doesn't matter. Email is not a Linux virus vector.

You can compromise a non root account and setup a DDOS server anyway. If you run the DDOS program it doesn't really matter what user you are.

Most linux attacks occur as a hole in a service such as ssh, apache, dns etc. These are not rooted because the main user is running as root.

Most Linux attacks do not occur as a hole in a service because services are inherently easier to attack, it's because they're the ones with the root privileges the attacker needs to be able to do other things to your system. If a large enough number of users start running Evolution as root, I guarantee hackers (crackers for the pedantic) will start looking for buffer overflows in the attachment-handling code in Evolution and you'll have Windows security all over again.

Linux email clients are not yet a vector because no one's running it at a privilege that it's worth finding a hole. When you change the user so that they're getting input from things over the net that don't go through a filter, bad things *will* eventually happen.

MacOSX did things the right way. Most of the time you run as an "Administrative" user who has rights to 99% of the filesystem, just like root, *BUT* can't write to system stuff where daemons and the like are without putting in the root password. It automatically asks for the password when you're trying to do something you don't have privileges for, and it's no big deal for power users *or* regular users. You really only see it when you install new software.

It's not like I'm complaining that they're running e-mail as root because there's no choice; I'm complaining that they're doing it when there's no reason to, and when it's so easy to *not* run it as root. Hell, the "evolution" link could be a shell script that sudo's to "mailuser" and runs it. I'm cool with giving the user as much rights as he wants by default for messing with the filesystem or whatever. Most users don't mess with those things anyways. The issue is that at the very least, high-visibility things that get a lot of data from untrusted places should not be run as root without a reason. "Everything else is already run as root so why not?" isn't a terribly good reason. =) Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Redhat 8.0 has directory on the redhat ftp server though it's only administrator access at the moment, This means the iso's have already being made and they are being put up but they are waiting a couple of days till all the mirrors have it



ftp> ls

200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV.

150 Here comes the directory listing.

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 1.0

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 1.1

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 2.0

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 2.1

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 3.0.3

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 4.0

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 4.1

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:14 4.2

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:15 5.0

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:15 5.1

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:16 5.2

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:17 6.0

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:18 6.1

drwxr-xr-x 9 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:29 6.2

drwxr-xr-x 9 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:33 7.0

drwxr-xr-x 10 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:39 7.1

drwxr-xr-x 4 0 0 4096 Jul 16 22:13 7.2

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 16 22:13 7.3
dr-x------ 3 218 0 4096 Sep 17 20:35 8.0

drwxr-xr-x 17 0 0 4096 Sep 04 12:23 beta

drwxr-xr-x 13 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:12 code

lrwxrwxrwx 1 0 0 3 Jun 08 18:16 current -> 7.3

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 13 10:42 enterprise

drwxr-xr-x 3 0 0 4096 Jul 16 22:13 ibm

drwxr-xr-x 10 529 529 4096 Aug 30 22:47 rawhide

drwxrwsr-x 22 0 235 4096 Jul 16 22:07 updates

226 Directory send OK. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:42:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? There's a lot of discussion about the way Evolution is handling mail attachment. Unlike the "Outlook/Outlook Express" monopoly on the Win32 platform, Evolution is not even the default mail handler for LindowsOS. It's a CNR app.

Netscape Mail is the default. As long as there are choices for handling this stuff, there's *another* level of safety. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:50:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Two questions: what browser plugins are installed by default -- realplayer, acrobat, java, flash, etc. Can you d/l these with CNR if they are not installed by default?

Can you d/l the isos for Lindows without paying the $99? In other words, it's my understanding that the $99 gets you access to CNR. What if you just want the distro and not use CNR? Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? There's a lot of discussion about the way Evolution is handling mail attachment. Unlike the "Outlook/Outlook Express" monopoly on the Win32 platform, Evolution is not even the default mail handler for LindowsOS. It's a CNR app.

I was using it as an example, the argument is just as valid no matter what app you use.

Netscape Mail is the default. As long as there are choices for handling this stuff, there's *another* level of safety.

99% of users will never use anything other than the default, so it's a level of safety only for those that know enough to help prevent problems in the first place. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 12:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Lindows will do well because it has a business man at the helm. Good marketing and good deals have already propelled it way ahead of Lycoris and Xandros in the Corporate/Public eye.

Look at the deal with AOL and the deal with Walmart. They were both strokes of brilliance IMHO.

LindowsOS will probably succeed. I wish they'd rename it though. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Once you pay for the software and become an Insider, you have access to the source code of all GPL'ed software. Items like Click-N-Run, developed outside the GPL, are notably absent, but this is NOT a violation of the license. Only software that includes GPL'ed code must be revealed.

As I understand it, there is a EULA (by any other name) which prohibits you, an Insider, from redistributing the GPL'd software.

That would be a violation of the GPL.

Can you confirm if there is any license agreement, and what it says about your rights to redistribute (not just access) GPL code? Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? if joe user installs a linux distro cos he's heard it's 'kewl', he's going to protect his root account with a good password right ?? or he might just think uh! wots this, think i'll leave the password blank or set it to 'mydogsname'...tick...tick....
then he thinks, kewl i'll install this apache web server thing i've heard of too...

an os's security is only as good as the moron that installs it Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Richard: Linux email clients do not execute attachments. If I run as root you don't have some greater advantage sending email viruses to me. It doesn't matter. Email is not a Linux virus vector.

The reason why there is no email borne mail viruses for Linux is because none of the mail clients aren't widely used. Outlook Express has more users than KMail or Evolution could hope for. Now, if these email clients get famous, I'm very darn sure there would be security risk.

And the problem with the average Joe is that he doesn't understand the need to install updates all the time, and just say a UN resolution requiring all Windows workstations to be converted to LindowsOS workstations, and cause a rise of users - trust me, it would be almost as insecure as Windows + Outlook Express.

I remembered once people on Slashdot saying that Gnutella is a hundred times more secure than Fastrack (name? the one used in kaZaa?), and now there is a Linux virus travelling through it infecting unpatched Apache servers.

Besides, you overestimated the power of dumb users. If it that easy to get a user to open a email attachment with a *.exe or a *.vb, imagine how it would be like when *.bin's

But as you said, most mishaps would happen from the user straying. Most of Windows 9x dying is caused by stray apps or the user's mishap.

DCMonkey: On the recommendation to include the GIMP: Go ahead, if you want to scar your users for life (well, maybe not _life_

Yeah, maybe they should bundle along The Gimp dumbed down to be like Photoshop Elements. And with a UI that is much self-explanary, e.g. Paint Shop Pro-like.

Cloudy: You want "S-E-C-U-R-I-T-Y" ??? Disconnect from the network and you'll have maximum security !

Yes. Disconnecting the greatest phenomenon since slice bread? Most people who buy computers now would every now and then use the Internet.

What lindowsOS is doing is making unnesscary risks by making new users to use root by default. They should/could have done the same thing as Mac OS X by making the user by default an "Adminstrator", which isn't "root", but able to do what most users would want to do - install apps, add new hardware, stuff like that.

a. Whether your like it or not, BeOS was a great single user OS and for multimedia you DON'T need multiusers and 'security'.

Being single user is probably the main reason why I didn't introduce this OS to many people I know. Many people I know *shares* computers. They use different settings, different colour schemes, different wallpapers etc.

Yeah, multimedia on BeOS was great, I still haven't seen anything stable that is as good as SoundPlay. But being single-user was really bad. If they couldn't make a multiuser system, they should copy Windows 9x, where settings is just in a file, completely insecure.

Adam Scheinberg: Netscape Mail is the default. As long as there are choices for handling this stuff, there's *another* level of safety.

Then just find for buffer overflows in Netscape Mail attachment handling code. Nothing is secure.

Charlie: Look at the deal with AOL and the deal with Walmart. They were both strokes of brilliance IMHO.

Any company can do the AOL deal. AOL don't mind you bundling their software as long they have nothing to loose. So if you spend time porting their software, they don't really care. Any company can do that.

As for Walmart, not many people buy PCs from Walmart, especially from Walmart's website.

Steve: That would be a violation of the GPL.

Wow, suddenly you are a lawyer and managed to outsmart the lawyers of FSF? Wed, 25 Sep 2002 13:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Steve,

The EULA is kind of amusing. It does NOT prohibit you from redistributing it. It asks you, in a well worded way, not to. It says something like "We ask that you not distribute this software..." There is nothing to limit you from sharing it, but it is requested that you don't. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? jbolden1517 says: 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.


I have no issue with most of the compromises they make to make the system more usable to the average user. The problem is, the reason people will move to Lindows from Windows is to get away from the rampant problems that MS has, with crashing and with security. Why switch to Lindows at all if Lindows dumbs itself down enough that it's just as susceptible to problems? It'll still be a bit more stable, but 2000 or XP with good hardware (and trusted drivers) is stable enough. On UNIX systems, *even if* they trick the user into doing something, it can only mess up their sandbox.

First off I think Lindows is going to be going after the under $500 market that commodore used to own where stability is not much of an issue. At this point I'm not sure that a Linux desktop is any more stable than a windows desktop or a linux server much more stable than a windows one. The biggest difference would be ease of repair in case of moderate damage. Things like Exchange can go down very very hard.

As for damaging the sandbox only. That's not true. Virtually any Linux is toast once you have even user level access to the system. Very few Unixes (and no Linuxes to the best of my knowledge) can hold up long against a hostile insider. You have way too many systems on a Unix that are Turing complete, suid to a highly privledged user, and provide access to all users. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? About the Wine stuff.
Ever tried running IE installed on another Windows machine with Windows? Doesn't work, same with Word. Their first preview was able to install and run MS Office 2000 (so I don't think they will drop support for that). Looking at the current state of IE and WMP in Wine, I do think they will be supported in the final version.
Also lots of popular file sharing apps such as Kazaa and WinMX work pretty good with Wine.

I really beleave the root-thing is a problem though. Lots of people these days download all sorts of junk and just click on whatsever they downloaded. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? It has nothing of the advantages of Linux (security, openess), neither the ones of Windows (running windows appz).

So, why call it Lin-dows ?

Oh, I got! Because it has all the drawbacks of Linux (not enough devices drivers, poor integration) and the ones of Windows (not secure)

Finally, Lindows is a pretty good name


Seriously: Lindows is purely marketing, nothing more. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? The review is nice but looks more like a piece of PR than a real journalistic work. Most commercial distribution install easily on a vanilla hardware. The acid test today is configuration of a wifi card or some usb gadget. Is Lindows better than Mandrake / Suse or RedHat on this field, I doubt it and that is important fo a casual Windows user.
If you want a Debian based distribution with very easy and quick installation and the latest KDE try knoppix
http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.htm
More or less, what you get with Lindows but with more useful software and a price of 0$

Lindows has been extensively using Gnu/Linux, Debian and KDE. It is their definite right, KDE code is GPL. But I think it is good practice for a commercial company relying so much on GPL products to give back to the community. Suse and Mankrake sponsor key developers in the KDE project. Lindows has done absolutely nothing exept paying a nominal fee to be part of the small KDE PR body KDELeague. When you buy a Mandrake or a Suse box, part of your money pays the development of your computer. When you buy Lindows overpriced distribution, your money ends in Mr. Robertson greedy hands.

We should educate the consumers not to fall for marketing gimmicks. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Greetings all, get a fresh cup of coffee, I'ma gonna vent:
I'm pretty new to Linux, downloaded some Distro's (.ISO),
burned 'em, tried 'em. Only a few found my sound, video, and Lan. I have a buncha computers (bout 15). Found Win98, 98SE, and ME, pretty easy to network.......fairly easy to set up sound, video, and MODEM. MODEM MODEM MODEM
Bought a SS50 that had WinXP(Home) installed, it dint like networking with my Win98 so I dumped it. They're either WITH me or AGIN' me.....
I am semi-retired and a computer tinkerer. Build most from scratch.
I have learned to love Partition Magic, Norton Utilities, Ultimate Boot Disk, Gdisk, Ghost, ZoneAlarm, AD-aware, Aspy32, AVG(anti-virus), RegCleaner, TWEAKUI, X-Setup, Desktop Architech, Rain, Crazy Browser, Mozilla, MealMaster, MBprobe, Nero, scroll mouse and trackballs, LCD panels and smaller form factor computers, www.pricewatch.com , Anandtech forums, Tom's hardware, www.distrowatch.com , and eBay. Next computer I build will prolly be a SpaceWalker SS40 w/AMD 2100+ or wherever the best price break is, 17"LCD, DVDRW/CDRW.
Don't like many self-starting programs, trackers, or phone home programs ....do like self starting desktops.
Used to be really good in DOS about writing batch files and menus and even some programs, even some with graphics.
Through many operating crashes I learned that I didn't want the OS to set the whole hard drive up as one partition. I keep system critical files and utilities on C: and big stuff on D: Winamp... ..Mealmaster.. ..Map n' Go..and my Download directory. Also put .ISO's there until I can burn them. Keep all drives less than 8.4gb so 4k blocks are used. My typical drive size is usually Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Says Ecureuil, " it is good practice for a commercial company relying so much on GPL products to give back to the community."

WHY?

The projects are GPL. That means they don't have to give back to the community. Just because it's nice to share doesn't mean it is BAD practice not to! One problem with lots of open source licensing is that most people get this ridiculous belief that they have a right to all future derivations of the code under any circumstance.

Anyway, Lindows.com does share a small percentage of their improvements. I understand they've contributed to WINE and Debian.

MR is a businessman. Lindows.com is out to make money. They have a good product. This is America. Don't be naive: that's not bad practice, that's good practice. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? You don't get it - Joe User is not aware of or going to try knoppix.

rajan - I have no sales figures, but Wal-Mat has been selling the Microtel's with Lindows since the beginning of July. I have often looked to see if they're still selling them, thinking perhaps it would be something that would not last long, but they're still there. They must be selling enough of them to make it worth their while to do so. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Sold me I gots to try it.
I think you gets two years for $99 (Click 'n Run).
Limited time offer?
Family license no per seat/computer
My previous post got moded down because I used a cussword.
I said NOOB.
Dint think it was that bad and I wurked really hard on it. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 16:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? To answer Mr. Scheinberg :
1) Lindows has not helped Debian or Wine
Mr. Robertson has sponsored a Wine meeting and offer to sponsor part of a Debian meeting. The only reason is to give more PR for his company and to make the Linux believe that he is nice guy. That is totally wrong, a nice guy his somebody who contributes some code even if it helps your competitors. If Mr. Robertson cannot understand that, he has no place in the community and must be considered only has some kind of shoplifter.

2) Mr Robertson is a smart businessman
All the astroturfers promoting Lindows sing the same mantra : You don't understand Lindows is not for the regular Linux user but for Joe User (understatement Joe user is American, stupid, will only use AOL and fall to simple marketing tricks and can never understand anaything else than Windows 98).
Well I believe that even dumb users can be educated, that people can learn how to use better their computer and spend their money more wisely. If I help, in my own little way, the KDE project, it is not because of self pride or greed, but because I want other people to use more effectively their computer. One of the role of power users is to help and educate simple users. Knoppix is a community based distribution and will never run adds for the superbowl but if you download it, burn a few cds and give them around to your friends, colleagues, you are spreading the Gospel and helping people not to fall in marketing snares. It a small step but a useful one.

A salesman that sells to a weak old grandmother an expensive encylcopedia that she doesn't need is maybe a smart salesman but that doesn't make him a moral person.

3) Choose the right robber baron
Mr. Scheinberg likes robber barons. But, if you like that part of capitalism, why not choose Bill Gates and buy Windows XP. At least, Bill Gates really loves computers and have created a fundation for vaccination in Third-World countries. If you pay the 99$ for Lindows click and steal program you will certainly help Mr. Robertson pay the mortgage of his mansion, his daughter will have brand new plastic surgery, and his son a new sports car.

Mr. Scheinberg, you and me are not part of the same community... Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Ecureuil, I'll take the bait and take this one step further in this forum, and if you prefer, we can continue offline.

The community you envision is one I'd love to be a part of, but I also recognize that this is not just a magical place where everyone shares out of sheer altruism. Part of the reason Linux as an OS is not more popular --PART OF THE REASON-- is that there's not as much commercialization behind it.

Mr. Robertson can buy a mansion, a car, or even a night of hookers and booze for all I care, I'm buying a product. I don't ask my grocer what he does when I buy a steak, I don't ask my local power company does in exchange for the money I give them, since I get something: electricity. You exchange money for goods, and Lindows.com feels that LindowsOS and CNR are worth money. If you don't agree, you have amazing power as a consumer - don't buy their product.


Put simply: 1) Lindows.com has no obligation to the community, though it would be nice, 2) it's nice to be satisfied for having done the "right" thing, but it's also nice to make money, 3) "Robber baron" is fancy and glorified rhetoric - you're striving to make me look like I'm some sort of sell-out or clueless drone... and it's very obvious. A corporation is a corporation. I don't want to fund Michael Eisner, Bill Gates, Rupert Murdock, or Ted Turner's personal habits, but I buy or recommend their products. How is this any different? Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? > To answer Mr. Scheinberg:

An answer in which you completely ignored his points and continued posting the same ridiculous remarks and sloppy accusations. I think Adam would have better luck of engaging someone in intelligent conversation by talking to your desk.

> Well I believe that even dumb users can be educated, that people can learn
> how to use better their computer and spend their money more wisely.

So does everyone else with a brain, but the point that he was making is, "What will sell LindowsOS?" Or for the simple minded, believing that dumb users can be educated does not sell products.

> If I help, in my own little way, the KDE project, it is not because of self pride or
> greed, but because I want other people to use more effectively the computer.

That is nice, but I wish that you would stop telling others that it is _wrong_ for them not to contribute.

> Knoppix is a community based distribution and will never run ads for the
> superbowl but if you download it, burn a few cds, and give them around to
> your friends, colleagues, you are spreading the Gospel...

Jesus uses Knoppix? *jaw drops to the floor*

> A salesman that sells to a weak old grandmother an expensive encyclopedia
> that she doesn't need is maybe a smart salesman but that doesn't make him a
> moral person.

Are you trying to make a point...?

> Mr. Scheinberg likes robber barons.

You should not have to smear others to make your points. It is not wrong for other people to make money by selling what they produce, regardless of whether what they produce is software, hardware, squash, beanie babies, or OSNews T-shirts. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? No need to take the discussion off forum.

You made your point. I made mine. You will buy Lindows, I won't.

I agree that people spend their money the way they want. We must only take care that the consumer gets all the facts.

Cheers and have a nice day,
Ecureuil Wed, 25 Sep 2002 20:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I purchased the el CheapO model from Wal-Mart. It works fabulous. I am so impressed with Lindows it does what I want. I am new to computers and if this is any indication of what computing is all about I have been missing out the last 10 years. Can anyone tell me though what is better? It seems like the Apple folks talk in glowing terms about OS-X, Windows people think XP is wonderful and the Linux community each think their versions are number 1. All I know this system works for all my work. Thanks for letting me voice my opinion. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I'm Jane User.

I'm trying to leave Windows behind. I first tried with Corel Linux, and while I found it easy to install, it was a nightmare to use. I was constantly RTFM, or on the phone with my guru, logging in and out as root just to try and figure out where various applications had installed.

And frankly, I don't much like the command line. The Corel manual was constantly telling me to go to the command line to do things.

While I don't mind building my own computer, I don't want to use an OS with a hellishly steep learning curve when I just want to get on line, type an article, or FTP a file.

The first *nix that didn't make me scream in frustration was Apple's OS X. All the powertools are there if I *want* to get to them, but I don't *need* to know them to use the OS. (And I'm slowly but surely teaching myself how a *nix OS works.)

Lindows sounds like it might be the same thing for x86 computers. A *nix OS where I don't need to know the ins and out of the command line to make my windowing scheme work, and where I don't need to compile the kernel or type in a bunch of mount commands just to have have things/functionality I'm accustomed to having straight out of the box.

I don't doubt that mucking about at the command line, setting up all sorts of little slick customizations can be a really rewarding thing. But when it comes to software, most people just want it to work, NOW. Wed, 25 Sep 2002 21:58:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Eugenia makes the point the LindowsOS is not about being part of the community, they are about making money. Eugenia also says that LindowsOS target is the Windows user and not Linux users (or something like that).

Anyway the logical conclusion to me is that if they are successful enough they may fork Linux and take what they have got from the community and start hiring more and more of there own developers to the point where less and less is GPL. I am sure that there will always be a lot of things under GPL, but enough may be removed to avoid the possibility of another company recreating LindowsOS as Mandrake etc did with Redhat.

Just some thoughts, use them, lose them, you know. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 01:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? That won't happen. The Linux kernel gets faster updates by the standard situation, Lindows people won't be able to be as fast implementing features and fixing bugs. There is absolutely no reason to fork anything.. They just use the kernel for their purposes. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 01:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? What you say makes complete sense. There is no way they could keep up with the Linux Kernel Development and apps right now. I did mean GNU/Linux and not just the kernel. I was thinking of just enough non GPL to make things incompatible.

I think I agree with you it would be extremely difficult to reach the kind of Market share, even in the future (5years+)necessary to achieve what I envision. I mean a situation where they could create enough non GPL apps that are close enough to the OS in the broad sense (Windows def of OS), where developers (non OSS) would create apps exclusively for them and not normal GNU/Linux distros.

Sorry if this reads like nonesense, pretty hard to articulate a vague notion.

Maybe thats my problem! Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:02:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Sorry, I also forgot to compliment you on a great article. I read and it sort of, at least half changed my mind about the virtues of LindowsOS and the company. Also about running as root for their audience.

Nice work! Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? That was all Adam's work. Thanks anyway though, you are sweet. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:17:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? > Anyway the logical conclusion to me is that if they are successful enough
> they may fork Linux and take what they have got from the community and
> start hiring more and more of there own developers to the point where
> less and less is GPL.

In a way that is also what the GPL stands for. The FSF wanted to make sure that code was always openly available so that people could use it to learn and to start new projects in addition to many other things. Lindows.com is using the GPL'ed projects to create their own operating system to compete with Microsoft.

To some the fact that LindowsOS is commercial and proprietary makes them rinkle their noses in disgust, but in the end that is what the GPL is all about. LindowsOS is still dependent on the open source software that they sell with CNR, just as they are dependent on the Linux kernel, the windowing systems, the drivers, etc.

Even though they make money, Lindows.com is still forcing Microsoft and the other desktop operating systems to improve their systems. Sharing code is nice, but competition is also a good thing. CNR challenges Linux, and the Linux developers will respond with better package management software while distributions create simplified and more logical menu systems.

I do not think that the anti-capitalist jihads that people tend to engage in actually help the free software and open source communities. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I do not think that the anti-capitalist jihads that people tend to engage in actually help the free software and open source communities.

Agreed.

If OSS companies like Redhat, SuSE etc. make money all the better. The more they make the better service they can provide. Thats why I pay for SuSE, bought ReKall etc.

I actually don't really care if the is closed or not. I wish BE had been successful. I think at the end of the day both philosophies(Closed and Open) should co-exist and drive each other forward. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 02:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Ok note all of this is that i am a windows user. Tell me this things do evolve right i guess lindows is gonna evolve right seriuosly i am sick of all this omg linux is attacked by all us newbies we gonna open attachments and all that other insecure stuff. I heard that linux in fact evolves faster than windows for it being open source and stuff right. Lindows is somewhat a linux distro right and i guess it is somewhat opensource right i bet u people can fix all this insecure things going around and give us windows people a chance right now i live on windows xp and i do hate paying and forced using microsoft i want some competition out there microsoft is ripping people off like it was nothing with there OS oh don't even go there with MS office look at how much people have to fork over for that oh man pay more money more themes jeez oh wait look windowsupdate.com thank god for cable modems oh wait i don't got one right sp1 is something i need [i really do have a cable modem im looking at this from the people getting screwed]. Did anyone see techtv how Leo Laporte went to a website and his windows directory was erased oh microsoft really secure. I HAVE A BRIGHT IDEA ok maybe all u linux community should intentionally make viruses or hacks and then send it to the people making distros so they make the operating system more secure that can help. Hey we really need something out there to compete with microsoft and look at all the current distros now don't seem like anything is penetrating the market lets see if lindows can do it hey if it runs my windows apps fine hey they got me on there list to customers i am really starting to hate microsoft i want this fight to be something like intel vs amd nvidia vs ati. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 06:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I think the single greatest advantage of Linux (and other UN*X variants in general) over that of the Windows world is the distinction between the superuser and regular users. That's why even if viruses are written for UN*X, they can't do much harm. I mean, if you don't run them as root.

I am afraid that with the LindowsOS approach of "root by default", a new outbreak of Linux viruses could start. I'm sure even they don't want that.

Of course, even if such an outbreak occurs, it will not have much effect if people using Linux will stick with a distribution that has a different (privilege separation) approach.

One possible resolution to the run as root by default problem could be including a specially hardened kernel in the LindowsOS distribution that limits the root user's access - however, I am not holding my breath. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? the reason there are few viruses in the *nix world is that 97% of the world are MS users.
more converts to linux will increase the number of vulnerable systems, OS security depends on the sys admin Thu, 26 Sep 2002 14:15:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Running as root is just plain wrong and it isn't rocket science to have the system create a regular user account the first time you login. I mean, come on. People (Windows users) do it for Windows already. The argument that you need root access for installing software can be easily solved using tools like sudo. The big difference would be that it would be a real measure of security, unlike Windows where user names have no real meaning and security is nonexistant. I agree that unless this is changed, we will end up with LindowsOS being just as insecure as Windows when it doesn't have to be. Even my meager programming skills could solve this problem and if the "engineers" at Lindows.com can't figure this out, then I feel sorry for anyone who tries to use this desktop OS.

As for how to educate users about security, help text in a dialog box that has a timeout before allowing the user to close it could accomplish this, so the comment about training being a problem is a straw man.

Tom S. Thu, 26 Sep 2002 17:03:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? A lot of people with Linux backgrounds that have commented here miss the point of Lindows even after it has been said and repeated umpteen times.

LindowsOS is here for 1 thing. To make money. You can comment all you want on broken promises and free PR. Lindows.com doesn't want you, they won't lose sleep over your opinions or the fact that they're 'not helping the linux community'. What Linux community? Who cares? Show me the money.

They wants Windows users. They exists for Windows users. They want windows users willing to pay cash for an alternative.

S.

P.S. Surely the more ex-windows users running non MS OS's the better? If it happens to be using Linux, they might even learn something. Mon, 30 Sep 2002 07:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? I am a Windows user. In fact, I've been using Windows since 3.0 and over the years I've tried about 10-15 Linux distro's in various incarnations.

THE thing that ALWAYS puts me off with Linux, is that I HAVE TO drop to command-line and do stuff like /usr/root/moot/blah/blah -xfe3|j3w and such NONSENSE. Why not make a window with all the options so you can click/select the options?!?

Until there is such a distro, I say bollocks to Linux. It's NOT for me. I don't want to spend hours or days configing my system, which windows handles AUTOMATICALLY...

Bring on the flames... I don't care... Mon, 30 Sep 2002 11:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? Well it appears to me that the reason it threw you 5 errors is because that is what the typical windows user would feel most comfortable with. if it was running good all the time they would start to get worried. :^) None the less, this was a good article.
nexen_sec@yahoo.com Wed, 02 Oct 2002 13:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://www.osnews.com/thread? http://www.osnews.com/thread? hey punk you talk about linux one more time and i'll kick your .asp


anyways, i just had to flame ya :^) nah, I wanted to say you do have a point about the command line. altho the useability would be less than nil for all command line utilities to be displayed in a GUI with corresponding checkboxes, it is still a good idea that someone should look into. None the less, the problems with the command line stem from gnu/linux's roots. it started out as a command line (CLI) operating system, and had a GUI (xfree86, ugh) duct-taped onto it. Now, this isn't too dissimilar with windows. It started out as command line origionally when microsoft had stolen it from ibm, but as the gui evolved they lost their roots, and of course with the inclusion of BSD code into Windows XP, they have come to be a bit more of an operating system than an operating environment. Well, i forget my point but remember: most people that use gnu/linux do it because of the philosophy behind it, or just because it's so danm cool, i cant decide which :^)
laterz
nexen_sec@yahoo.com Wed, 02 Oct 2002 14:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments