Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th Aug 2012 20:46 UTC
Linux "For years now, Linux has been a black sheep standing in the shadow of Apple and Microsoft. Despite having a fervent and enthusiastic following, the operating system hasn't been able to grab a sizable share of the computing market and has instead been content to subsist on the customers that come away dissatisfied with the mainstream competition. But that may be about to change. With the release of Microsoft Windows 8 on the horizon, some are saying Linux may have a great opportunity to steal a significant share of the market away from Microsoft, allowing it to finally take the helm as a major operating system service provider." This has to stop, and the only reason I'm linking to this nonsense is to make this very clear: Linux will not magically conquer the desktop or even make any significant gains because of Windows 8. People who don't like Windows 8 (Vista) will continue to use Windows 7 (Windows XP). This is getting so tiring. And does it even matter? Linux is winning big time in the mobile space, server space, and countless other spaces. The desktop is and always has been irrelevant to Linux.
Thread beginning with comment 532927
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Yeah...
by ze_jerkface on Wed 29th Aug 2012 09:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Yeah..."
ze_jerkface
Member since:
2012-06-22

Just a worthless annoyance that might catch a somewhat more more experienced user, but those are the people who are likely to have minimal trouble anyway.


Uh no it is not a worthless annoyance when it stops a drive-by attack. When someone is just visiting kittens.ru looking for photos and UAC pops up they are unlikely to hit OK.

but I do still get annoyed seeing the latest Windows operating systems royally infected even six years after I jumped ship


You seem to be one of those people who think that the Linux kernel provides superior protection by not being NT. That was a baseless belief in 2005 but with Android it has been completely shattered:
http://www.bgr.com/2012/08/17/android-malware-q2-2012-study/

Since Wp7 has less malware than Android it becomes hard to believe that malware is the direct result of Microsoft being unable to create a secure system.

The dancing pigs problem isn't the fault of Windows and wouldn't be solved by requiring a password. Switching everyone to Linux wouldn't solve it either.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Yeah...
by UltraZelda64 on Wed 29th Aug 2012 09:42 in reply to "RE[5]: Yeah..."
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Uh no it is not a worthless annoyance when it stops a drive-by attack. When someone is just visiting kittens.ru looking for photos and UAC pops up they are unlikely to hit OK.

Clearly it's not stopping these drive-by attacks too well, otherwise I would have nothing to be bitching about.

You seem to be one of those people who think that the Linux kernel provides superior protection by not being NT.

I don't recall making such a claim. In fact, aside from using the term "Linux" in a generic sense meaning "Linux distribution," I don't even know what the hell you're talking about; sudo is certainly not a feature of the kernel. Sure, I mentioned that I run Linux (again, as in an OS with the Linux kernel) now and that I no longer run Windows, but my opinion is more like this: Linux is not special in any major way compared to most other common operating systems, server or desktop. UNIX, BSD, Linux, whatever--they all tend to be quite adequate as far as I can see.

Hell, even Mac OS X is decent to an extent, although Apple's quest to simplify things for their users at the expense is finally starting to bite them in the ass (sounds a lot like a certain monopolistic U.S. technology company, doesn't it?). I am not specifically saying that Linux itself is better than Windows. I am saying that Windows' security just sucks compared to pretty much everything else out there. Go ahead and debate that if you want--you seem like you'll pull some kind of shit out of your ass to defend Microsoft. That much can be inferred from your previous posts.

The idiots trying to get to porn and see bunnies hopping doesn't help anything at all, but at the same time Windows makes it disturbingly easy to get screwed--and the patches Microsoft is putting out just don't help.

The dancing pigs problem isn't the fault of Windows and wouldn't be solved by requiring a password. Switching everyone to Linux wouldn't solve it either.

I would argue that switching everyone to Linux would be a bad idea anyway (didn't I already say that in this topic?). A mono culture is never a good thing. Although, if everyone used Linux in general (as in, an operating system based on the Linux kernel) but everyone used different distributions instead of everyone using Ubuntu or Mint, I would imagine the situation to still be better than what Windows faces today. A nice even combination of Linux, BSD, UNIX, Mac OS X, Windows, etc. would be optimal--where by "Linux" I mean a nice, healthy selection of at least a half-dozen or a dozen distros with relatively even shares of users.

Of course, this is all hypothetical. It doesn't make up for the fact that Microsoft has made countless braindead-stupid design decisions in the past, with UAC being just one of the more recent ones in how it was implemented. A good idea, yeah--but useless the way it was set up. That's UAC.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Yeah...
by ze_jerkface on Wed 29th Aug 2012 10:05 in reply to "RE[6]: Yeah..."
ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

I am saying that Windows' security just sucks compared to pretty much everything else out there.

Says the guy who would thinks UAC is worthless. What exactly sucks compared to everything else? Be specific. I work with both Linux and Windows so please enlighten me.

Windows makes it disturbingly easy to get screwed--and the patches Microsoft is putting out just don't help.


WTF are you talking about? So it would make no difference if people turned off updates? That is actually one of the biggest problems.


I would argue that switching everyone to Linux would be a bad idea anyway (didn't I already say that in this topic?). A mono culture is never a good thing.


But wouldn't 100k randomly generated binary incompatible versions of Windows have a better result? So again Windows itself isn't the problem. That's like saying Windows has security problems that can be improved by shutting off the internet twice a week. It's not a systemic problem, reduced exploits through binary incompatibility is a security strategy that is separate from Windows.

People who run Windows 98 today don't have to deal with malware.
Android has far more malware than Windows 98. Conclusion: Windows 98 has superior security. We should switch all smartphones to Windows 98 to solve the Android malware problem.

Reply Parent Score: 2