In three months, Microsoft users will finally reap benefits from the company’s new focus on security. The release of the second major update to Windows XP answers many long-standing design criticisms of its operating system. What does this mean for Linux?Also, Microsoft reacts to marketing pressure to make design decisions favoring running a few processes faster but then finds itself forced first to layer in backward compatibility and then to engage in a patch-and-kludge upgrade process until the code becomes so bloated, slow and unreliable that wholesale replacement is again called for, says LinuxInsider.
What Linux can learn from Windows
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
“…improved firewall, the ability to turn off pop-up ads and ActiveX controls in Internet Explorer and a control panel that will display the current state of a PC’s security…”
In the current time there are many external applications which does this kind of job.
I imagine how home users will react to: “Users also will be urged to turn on the basic security protections…”
“The company still hasn’t put an indicator on the desktop for the most basic security function…”
I hope that people remember itself to check frequently the “security indicator”…
“Yet the service pack represents a solid step toward helping the overwhelming majority of customers who are not security-conscious enough to secure themselves.”
Is this a fact or a the author’s point-of-view only?
What really Linux has to learn with MS-Windows about security issues (who knows, maybe, the wrong side of security policies)? I think that there are other greatness projects (like BDSs) from which Linux will be better served about security questions instead to learning something from MS-Windows in this case.
Once I figured out what hosts.allow and hosts.deny were in Linux, I was pretty happy
But it’s not like thos features (er .. files) stick out like a sore thumb, as maybe they should.
is not apparant in the article. However, from a personal view, I could certainly say that Linux HAS been learning some things from MS Windows… mainly Lindows. “Ease of Use” is, in the end, what will win the desktop market. EoU is something that Lindows has been working on and that Linux et all need to learn.
Between EoU and Consumer Apps, Linux ought to be the desktop of choice. But not until then.
It’s been about 6 months since I’ve done an install of XP, but I seem to remember even Pro defaulting to logging you in as an admin user without requiring a password. Which makes it about as secure as Win9x, at least by default.
Of course, maybe Microsoft knows that the userland implementation of multi-user in 2k/XP is annoying enough to probably drive most users to just run logged in as an Admin all the time. I’m talking about error messages that basically say: “You can’t do N because you don’t have sufficient user priveleges”. The sensible thing to do would be to prompt the user for the credentials of a user who DOES have sufficient priveleges (as “Users and Passwords” does, unlike most of the other control panel applets) – hell, even KDE got this right – 3 or 4 years ago!
I am getting a copy of XP pro, and having never played with it. What are the user settings? I know the user can’t install programs but is there a way to use it as a user, or should I just create an admin account for myself.
I agree, when it comes to security, Linux and windows have alot to learn from the BSDs. While there may be some things for the desktop that Linux could learn from windows.
“Still, any Linux version that claims to be for the desktop might want to borrow a page from Microsoft’s textbook and give users a central place to see the status of their data and computer system.”
For the Data, Linux had the user’s home directory and enforced the use of it. Apps in X all default to using the users home, where as only newer apps in windows will default to the users My Documents folder. Of course that’s probably because most of the people making apps on Linux are making them for a multiuser system.
As for system status, if you’re using Gnome or KDE I know you can easily get status information and for those not scared of the command line, there are easy to use tools there too.
“I agree, when it comes to security, Linux and windows have a lot to learn from the BSDs. While there may be some things for the desktop that Linux could learn from windows.”
Linux could probably learn more from other desktop OSes with better user interfaces, such as Mac, Amiga or BeOS.
However, from a personal view, I could certainly say that Linux HAS been learning some things from MS Windows… mainly Lindows. “Ease of Use” is, in the end, what will win the desktop market. EoU is something that Lindows has been working on and that Linux et all need to learn.
But, ‘ease of use’ doesn’t necessarily mean ‘the Windows way’. People know how to use some features in Windows, not because they where well designed, but because they had to do it in a ass-backwards way many, many times.
If I break your fingers everday for a month, it becomes easy to break your fingers.
No, Linux has no “user interface”. In fact, I don’t believe a kernel with a “user interface” has ever been conceived.
Please stop blaming the Linux team for your dislike of Gnome, KDE, WM’s, et al.
Stop being so obtuse. You should know, when someone speaks of ‘Linux’, they are speaking of the operating system. If someone is singling out the kernal, they’ll say ‘the kernal’.
Handling of source code in GNU/Linux need to be improved. Its far too often that you hear that a wesite distributing code for commonly used Linux software have bin compromized. It even have happened to security software sites such as openssh.
We also needs to know for certain that a developer adding some code to software really is who he claims to be. Perhaps it could be handled with some digital signature extension to cvs.
If every peace of code could be traced back to its writer it would be possible for sites like openssh.org to make sure that people actually download what they think they do, and not some compromized code containing trojans etc.
Such system would also be a good way to the guard intellectual property of GNU/Linux.
…shouldn’t the title of the article be, “What Windows HAS LEARNED from Linux?” Whereever Windows goes with security, Linux has gone before and made a place for it.
I suggest the author waits till the Service Pack 2 has been thoroughly tested before assuming that it will correct 10 years old design flaws.
Linux users don’t fall for the promises made by Microsoft about their future releases. In three months Microsoft will undoubtedly release another security patch to–in their marketing words–the most secure OS ever. We’ve certainly heard that “line” before.
However it is good to see that Microsoft is beginning to learn something from the UN*X world.
The article should be title “Microsoft will improve security, really — Open Source desktops could improve ease of use, like MS Windows.” Wouldn’t that be a boring, re-hashed article…
Well an applet in the taskbar could be an interesting security feature. Something that helps you monitor and configure tripwire, and perhaps monitor the firewall. Even if that’s all that it does, it would be a good thing, especially in distros like Lindows. It would be really interesting if it would check the distro’s security updates, and tell you if there are some. Just a little green or red light, not annoying balloon windows like MS updates. Another feature might be to tell you remote connections, whether samba, ftp, apache, or ssh. Just to easily spot stuff.
And yeah, I dont’ think 1 SP is going to fix years of mis-engineering, but its a start. It could possibly cause a bunch of old apps to not work, in which case, some people might switch to linux(wishful thinking). Heck, WINE might run them still.
And a good backup utility that doesn’t require magnetic tape is still hard to find.
Amanda does and has been able to back up to disk for quite some time. And since it’s a tool that’s been used since back in the day and has adapted to the need to back up to a mounted file system, I’d argue that it is good. Easy to set up, easy to automate multiple days worth of backups on single, multiple, networked, local, disks as well as tape with varying levels of compression (done on client or server) for each volume backed up, what more does this dude want?
and as far as comments about BeOS being snappy, that doesn’t even begin to describe it
Still, any Linux version that claims to be for the desktop might want to borrow a page from Microsoft’s textbook and give users a central place to see the status of their data and computer system.
yeah, it’s called the command line! maybe MS should take note from Unix/Linux on that one. J/K I do agree that many OSS projects need to work on usability, but the CSOTLD (current state of the linux desktop) is lightyears ahead of where it was just 4 years ago (KDE 1.0 anyone?). windows has not made such a significant leap, nor will it be able to. the resources available to OSS projects however, will allow this same leap to occur another 4 years from nww and hopefully by then, windows will look like the unusable one.
“You can’t do N because you don’t have sufficient user priveleges”. The sensible thing to do would be to prompt the user for the credentials of a user who DOES have sufficient priveleges (as “Users and Passwords” does, unlike most of the other control panel applets) – hell, even KDE got this right – 3 or 4 years ago!
Actually, WinXp does prompt the user to login for that instance of the installation of a program. Happens with my PC at home when my children watch DVDs and the “intervideo” install comes up.
@ peragrin
You can run it as a user or even a power user without logging as admin. For installs as a user you should (I do) get a prompt at the same time it tells you that you lack sufficient rights. Just enter the Admin name and PW and you can install.
@ Kick The Donkey
If you think this is about user interface being a clone of Windows… no. Lindows tries to look like MS Windows, but it does not fully look like it. When I say “Ease of Use” I mean being able to install software and hardware without having to scratch my head and wonder where I can look up the drivers on some website that is not the manufacturers. Ease of Use is like the common symbols found on just about all Home Audio setups. That lazy elongated triangle means play no matter who makes the product. Ease of use is not cloning. There are a lot of annoyances I have with the way MS tries to make things “easier” while at the same time burying it further and further in menus. Secondly, ease of use does not mean you have to lean a completely new nomenclature to use the product. There are certain underlying principles that should be shared and found in common with all windowed OSes – be it MS Windows, OS X, SuSe, Red Had, etc… I may not have used OS X more than once, but I certainly could find how to set up it’s networking access when a friend brought his laptop to work – if only because it followed a principle about where things should be located structurally. There is other stuff. I don’t think most people “get” the idea yet about multiple work areas in Linux.
“Also CVS is deprecated and most projects are or will be moving to subversion soon.”
Um, I don’t think so. CVS will be around for some time still. Some of us really like CVS and can easily live with its warts in exchange for its plain-text repository format and light resource requirements.
And a good backup utility that doesn’t require magnetic tape is still hard to find.
I dunno. I keep my data on a Fat32 partition, so I can boot RH9 and use the excellent backup2l script. backup2l is great for an individual user, and lets me specify compression utility and have it cook the whole backup down to an .iso file.
Which is where the situation draws vacuum; I have to FTP the .iso to a Doze box to get a working driver for the DVD burner.
Moral: platform agnosticism breeds decent solutions.
I haven’t tried it, but backup2l might do well under cygwin–or not; I seem to recall tar crashing on me the one time I tried to do anything ‘of size’.
Why doesn’t the author even mention things like propolice and grsecurity? Propolice is not difficult to implement at all. Grsecurity takes a little time to configure correctly but it wouldn’t be too difficult to enable certain features by default in a binary disto.
Handling of source code in GNU/Linux need to be improved. Its far too often that you hear that a wesite distributing code for commonly used Linux software have bin compromized. It even have happened to security software sites such as openssh.
I don’t see any basis for fact in this statement at all. First of all openssh is a BSD project not a Linux one. Second, you have to be uber-stupid to download any software from a sketchy site and to my knowledge there has been no widespread distribution of compromised software from a trusted source. The only example I can think of was the issue with the kernel that was stopped before it was distributed.
I almost forgot…no one mentioned partimage for a backup tool. I use it to backup my drive onto a remotely mounted partition.
Learn what? How to release an OS before it’s fixed? How to not offer patches in a timely manner? How to charge the consumer for ever CPU he/she runs Windows on? Product Activation? How to continually feel like crap knowing your so called secure NT system is full of spyware and viruses? There’s nothing secure about running Windows on either your desktop or server.
Coming from years using Windows I finally took the leap to Linux and I’m feeling great about the switch. Sure some distros are not easy for newbies but then there are ones that are and still remain free. Novell’s SuSE is one of them that even offers a free download of Linux while offering many of the same tools found in WinXP. If anything M$ should fear Linux over taking the market of both businesses and home consumers. When the words FREE and OPEN SOURCE come up in a conversation about Linux distros and apps you quickly see the advantages over Gates Pimp Ware.
M$ is notorious for pressuring companies and distributors to install Windows. As well as feeding their B.S. to the public who don’t know any better. Another M$ B.S. link http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts/analyses.asp
I suggest the author waits till the Service Pack 2 has been thoroughly tested before assuming that it will correct 10 years old design flaws.
For exanple…?
What really Linux has to learn with MS-Windows about security issues (who knows, maybe, the wrong side of security policies)? I think that there are other greatness projects (like BDSs) from which Linux will be better served about security questions instead to learning something from MS-Windows in this case.
It is less of a leason and more of a warning; don’t put ease of use before security. Security and stability should ALWAYS take priority over ease of use. Security and stability should ALWAYS take priority over prividing backwards compatibility.
Foolish windows haters! All you did is strengthen the adversary. Now you’re be in trouble.
jmich, did you ever try linux or *BSD? Or you’re addicted to m$ b.s. windoze?
If so, i hope someday you’ll get your ass on linux and say “WOW, what i’ve missed!!!”
what can linux learn from windows ?
is this guy serious and if so, can I get some of what he has been smoking ?
Yesterday I bought Win 2000 Pro, to replace my Windows XP. I am going to run Win2000 inside VMWare on Arch Linux. Running Windows inside a VM is allegedly Microsoft’s solution to their security problems, and is why they bought Connectix (maker of VirtualPC).
I own 3 copies of XP Pro, but I am abandoning them all for a single copy of Win 2000 running inside VMWare. Why? Because I don’t like to type in a 44-digit security code everytime I change my hardware on one of my computers, after I already paid about $750 to keep them all legal.
I hope Microsofts security update will help Win2000 also, as I just purchased. If not, it wont be a big deal because it will still be running inside VMWare.
If you ever have a choice between Win 2000 and Win XP, choose Win 2000, unless you like calling Microsoft for permission to load your software. Last time I talked to a kid who messed up the number, so I had to listen, type in, and read back – 88 numbers!
i think linux shouldnt learn anything from ms.
as is see in other articles is, that people compare the loss of ease-of-use with windows.
but that is the wrong way, i think.
better than copying the behaviour of an os i would like to see new concepts in accessebility and handling.
if you say ‘linux can leran from ms’, so you can say ‘linux can learn from apple’ or ‘linux can learn from amiga’ or ‘linux can learn from whatever’.
yeah, the desktop in ms is on one side a really smooth thin, but theres always another of the coin.
and this side is called ‘bloated’.
i dont want to go too much in in detail, but there are defintely better choices and ways for a ‘desktop-linux’ than learning from ms.
I have failed to understand what the article author wants.
…shouldn’t the title of the article be, “What Windows HAS LEARNED from Linux?” Whereever Windows goes with security, Linux has gone before and made a place for it.
Agreed
It’s been about 6 months since I’ve done an install of XP, but I seem to remember even Pro defaulting to logging you in as an admin user without requiring a password.
That is a smart move, but lindows does that to right?
But, ‘ease of use’ doesn’t necessarily mean ‘the Windows way’. People know how to use some features in Windows, not because they where well designed, but because they had to do it in a ass-backwards way many, many times.
Right, I am sure mac is easy, but not a copy of windows. They almost have it they just need a better install system & a GUI tool for every config option, in the distros Config Panel.
“Second, you have to be uber-stupid to download any software from a sketchy site and to my knowledge there has been no widespread distribution of compromised software from a trusted source.”
There have been backdoors in tcpwrappers and other programs. In some cases it’s more secure to get the .rpm or package cause it’s been verified, unless you feel like looking through the source (which only 1 out of 100 users can even do).
“Running Windows inside a VM is allegedly Microsoft’s solution to their security problems, and is why they bought Connectix (maker of VirtualPC).”
I hate to ruin Microsoft’s day, but VM’s will be broken out of. Chrooting was defeated, and certainly breaking out of UML, etc. is tougher. However, as running inside VM’s becomes more common (VMware GSX, etc), exploits will be developed.
“If you ever have a choice between Win 2000 and Win XP, choose Win 2000, unless you like calling Microsoft for permission to load your software.”
Activation sucks, and I think most windows fans would agree with me on that.
“We also needs to know for certain that a developer adding some code to software really is who he claims to be.”
This is partially what the md5sums are for, you can verify the hash of ur download with the hash on the official site, even if you downloaded from a mirror. md5sum is almost infallible, assuming the original hash was of a clean, non-trojaned program. But your idea of dig signatures is cool too. You can bind a trojan to an windows exe and distribute, and windows rarely uses cryptographic hashes as integrity verification.
“Linux could probably learn more from other desktop OSes with better user interfaces, such as Mac, Amiga or BeOS.”
I prefer KDE to BeOS. And seems most power users would be frustrated by Mac. Perhaps OSX is better than the old school Mac I grew up on.
“I agree, when it comes to security, Linux and windows have alot to learn from the BSDs.”
SE linux, Adamantix, Immunix, etc are all cool linux projects. Most all features being developed in Openbsd have parallels or analogs in linux.
> but VM’s will be broken out of
About what VM are you talking? QEMU, Bochs, VirtualPC/VMWare?
The only way to break out of these VMs would be via network.