Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Nov 2007 21:22 UTC, submitted by irbis
Window Managers "Linux has proven amazingly flexible: after nearly 10 years of use, I'm still impressed by how the Linux operating system does exactly what I want on any type of hardware. Desktop customization is no exception; from the ultra-modern KDE and GNOME window managers to with the likes of Fluxbox and AfterStep, there's a Linux desktop to suit everyone."
Thread beginning with comment 285473
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: wm for a server?
by autumnlover on Tue 20th Nov 2007 14:27 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: wm for a server?"
autumnlover
Member since:
2007-04-12

How so? Do you perhaps mean that it is a myth that there are Linux viruses in the wild? All of the malware & virsues out there are actually for for Windows, not for Linux or Mac.


No. There ARE viruses and online threats on Linux (and even more of them for Mac, which is UNIX-based system after all). You wrote that using Linux alone protects me from viruses, which I consider a myth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux_computer_viruses_and_wor...

If Linux itself is a virus- and threat-free environment, then why there are so many security patches and updates for any supported distribution ?

Exactly what "missing applications" did you have in mind?


Last time I tried - to use Flash I have to install 32bit browser in 64bit environment:

http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=6b3af6c9&...

Other programs I have in mind: Adobe Acrobat, Avast Antivirus, ClamAV

Not on the Windows install CD, there isn't. Not from Microsoft, even after install. Oh, and you cannot get rid of the insecure, non-standard browser that IS installed, either.


Even when I create complete set of Ubuntu repos (4 DVDs and 1 CD) there still will be no Opera'a .deb on those. So situation is exactly the same as in Windows.

And for "usecure, non-standard browser" - there is no obligation to use it for browsing, even to leave it unblocked on firewall.

Registration is required on Windows YES!


You confused registration and activation. I can be anonymous user of properly licensed Windows, just like any non-commercial Linux distribution.

Outlook express comes with a Windows install.


Same as IE - there is no obligation to use it, and to leave it unblocked on firewall.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: wm for a server?
by apoclypse on Tue 20th Nov 2007 14:41 in reply to "RE[4]: wm for a server?"
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

The security updates are done by the developers as a stopgap. These updates are usually before anyone even knows there are security issues. That doesn't mean that these flaws are being exploited or even attacked. That just means that unlike some other developers the Linux community actually cares about security and actively searches for issues pertaining to security. They don't wait until the shit hits the fan like MS did with Xp. Like I wrote before the larger number of security patches that get sent out on Linux usually has to do with the large number of libs that get installed separately, and also the larger number of third party software that gets installed by default in a common linux distro. Each lib that gets patched is added to the list of patched updates. So if say libffmpeg gets updated it gets added to the list, but there are many such instances. Windows can put out patches that say they updated Mediaplayer and say nothing of the underlying libs that might have gotten updated along with it. So on paper it looks like Linux it looks like Windows has less security patches, but we all know that in reality that is not the case, regardless of the FUD that MS tries to feed users.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[5]: wm for a server?
by Soulbender on Tue 20th Nov 2007 15:45 in reply to "RE[4]: wm for a server?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

You wrote that using Linux alone protects me from viruses, which I consider a myth


It's not a myth. In practice using Linux considerably lowers the changes of your computer becoming infected with a virus. The chances aren't zero but pretty close.
Now, whether this is due to Linux being inherently more secure or due it not having as many users is a different issue.

If Linux itself is a virus- and threat-free environment, then why there are so many security patches and updates for any supported distribution ?


You are confusing security patches with the actual presence of virus. The fact that software has bugs does not lead to the automatic existence of virus exploiting said bugs.
Not that there arent any virus for Linux but the amount of virus for Windows is massively larger.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[5]: wm for a server?
by netpython on Tue 20th Nov 2007 16:35 in reply to "RE[4]: wm for a server?"
netpython Member since:
2005-07-06

Even when I create complete set of Ubuntu repos (4 DVDs and 1 CD) there still will be no Opera'a .deb on those. So situation is exactly the same as in Windows.

Not quite. There is no monthly patch cycle. Updates come as quicly as possible.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: wm for a server?
by lemur2 on Tue 20th Nov 2007 22:25 in reply to "RE[4]: wm for a server?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Last time I tried - to use Flash I have to install 32bit browser in 64bit environment:


Gnash. Works natively in 64-bit.
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/

Other programs I have in mind: Adobe Acrobat, Avast Antivirus, ClamAV


Use evince or kpdf for a native 64-bit PDF viewer. The other two programs are not required on a Linux system (especially a 64-bit one) to search for Windows viruses. Having said that, ClamAV is available as a .deb for 64-bit architectures:
http://www.clamav.org/download/packages/packages-linux

Even when I create complete set of Ubuntu repos (4 DVDs and 1 CD) there still will be no Opera'a .deb on those. So situation is exactly the same as in Windows.


On Linux, unlike Windows, out-of-the-box I get a W3C standards compliant browser, including SVG, that can pass the acid2 test (exactly as per the original claim). That browser is called Konqueror, not Opera.

The situation is not at all the same as in Windows.

And for "usecure, non-standard browser" - there is no obligation to use it for browsing, even to leave it unblocked on firewall.


It is embedded into the OS. You can't remove it entirely, and you can't stop it from running under some circumstances, even when it is not selected as the default browser. It presents its security holes despite what you might do by trying to use an alternative.

You confused registration and activation. I can be anonymous user of properly licensed Windows, just like any non-commercial Linux distribution.


You are correct. Sorry about that. I should have typed: "Activation is required, YES!".

Edited 2007-11-20 22:35

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[]: wm for a server?
by 6c1452 on Wed 21st Nov 2007 01:02 in reply to "RE[5]: wm for a server?"
6c1452 Member since:
2007-08-29

Last time I tried - to use Flash I have to install 32bit browser in 64bit environment:

Ubuntu 7.10 uses non-free flash with 64-bit firefox with a wrapper; I believe the package name is flash-nonfree (and it works great, by the way). My only 64-bit complaint is that I have to use mplayer32 for the wmv9dmo codec.

Other programs I have in mind: Adobe Acrobat, Avast Antivirus, ClamAV

I thought Clam AV was for *nix. At least, that's what it says on their site. Well, whatever; I don't need it myself. And I don't know about Acrobat, but I was using a Linux version of Adobe Reader a few releases back. Linux has good PDF readers, and a number of PDF makers (which I haven't tried).

As for Linux viruses, I have never heard of anybody encountering one in the wild, ever. Tell me when the last time was that you did, and I'll admit that there is any possibility of getting one.

Edited 2007-11-21 01:03

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: wm for a server?
by autumnlover on Wed 21st Nov 2007 03:56 in reply to "RE[5]: wm for a server?"
autumnlover Member since:
2007-04-12

Use evince (...) for a native 64-bit PDF viewer.


I found it unstable and producing garbage when scrolling some PDF-s. Adobe Acrobat displays such files just fine.

Gnash. Works natively in 64-bit.


Great. But it is not Flash.

It is embedded into the OS. You can't remove it entirely,


But still it can be blocked on firewall, and since its blocked I do not worry about IE being insecure.

"Activation is required, YES!"


If you got at least five XP boxes in your organisation, it isn't ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: wm for a server?
by autumnlover on Wed 21st Nov 2007 13:29 in reply to "RE[5]: wm for a server?"
autumnlover Member since:
2007-04-12

On Linux, unlike Windows, out-of-the-box I get a W3C standards compliant browser, including SVG, that can pass the acid2 test (exactly as per the original claim). That browser is called Konqueror, not Opera. The situation is not at all the same as in Windows.


Ahhh... Konqueror - you mean that thing, which pass acid2 test, but also fail on other 99,5% of websites, and is forcefully inserted into KDE without any means of uninstallation, just like IE into Windows ?

;-))

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: wm for a server?
by wirespot on Wed 21st Nov 2007 01:35 in reply to "RE[4]: wm for a server?"
wirespot Member since:
2006-06-21

If Linux itself is a virus- and threat-free environment, then why there are so many security patches and updates for any supported distribution ?


Were you dropped on your head as a baby? I would think the answer to be obvious. Linux is secure because there are constant patches and updates for it. Security is an ongoing struggle, in case you didn't know.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: wm for a server?
by autumnlover on Wed 21st Nov 2007 03:43 in reply to "RE[5]: wm for a server?"
autumnlover Member since:
2007-04-12

Were you dropped on your head as a baby?


Bullying when ran out of arguments ?

I would think the answer to be obvious.


I have mine too - Linux is secure (or unsecure) as every other OS. Its lack of desktop userbase gives false sense of security to overconfident people like you. See the steadily growing number of exploits in OS X and compare it with steadily growing number of OS X boxes being connected to the Internet.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: wm for a server?
by Soulbender on Wed 21st Nov 2007 01:59 in reply to "RE[4]: wm for a server?"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Adobe Acrobat, Avast Antivirus, ClamAV


I seriously dont know why you put clamav here. It's a) designed for *nix and b) available in 64bit versions.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: wm for a server?
by autumnlover on Wed 21st Nov 2007 03:32 in reply to "RE[5]: wm for a server?"
autumnlover Member since:
2007-04-12

b) available in 64bit versions


Well, I do not see it there:

http://www.clamav.org/download/packages/packages-linux

Check yourself

Reply Parent Score: 1