OEM vs Retail XP Pro

  • Thread starter Thread starter jeh
  • Start date Start date
Ruel said:
Oh my god! Don't make me laugh... The whole user account fumble on Windows
makes it insecure. When users have to run their applications as
administrator, it defeats having user accounts at all for security
reasons.
Click to expand...

I wanted to add, that the fact that it promotes users running in full blown
administrator mode at all, which is what 99% of all users do anyway,
demonstrates that security pretty much wasn't even a consideration at all
when it was developed.
 
David said:
I'm not going to play move the goal posts with you. You tried to suggest
there aren't any and there are.
Click to expand...

JD wrote:
The simple fact that there are VIRTUALLY no viruses for Linux
FYI: http://archives.cnn.com/2001/TECH/internet/03/23/linux.worm.idg/



No, just an understanding of human nature. If one wants to rob a bank
they don't go for a kid's piggy bank and if one wants to create general
mayhem with a virus they don't generally target 5% of the market when
there's 95% sitting there. Not to mention that the devil 'Bill Gates' is
a target.
Click to expand...

Of course those things are true, but their significance depends on
actual inherent weaknesses in Linux. So that old argument ends up
begging the question.

Really it's more of an argument against Windows than against the
Unix-derived OSes: monoculture is known to compound Windows's
vulnerabilities, but the argument is almost completely speculative when
applied to Linux, Unix, and Mac.

I mean that monoculture doesn't matter if there are no actual
vulnerabilities.

Besides that, a hypothetical internet that is only half Windows would
have its non-Windows side divided among Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake, BSD,
Mac, and other Unixes and Linuxes. So the monoculturalism would still
be almost all on the Windows side.
Plus, server and 'guru' users tend to be more secure in their practices
while home users, currently few using Linux but growing, merrily ignore
admonishments to not run open on Administrator and root accounts.
Click to expand...

It seems much less burdensome under Linux than under Windows to use an
unpriveleged account. After all, the concepts of 'user' and file
ownership are retrofitted to Windows and My Computer.
In fact, the first documented experimental virus was written in 1983, on
a DEC VAX 11/750 running Unix to demonstrate the vulnerability of
computer systems, long before 'Windows' was around to be the fall guy
Click to expand...

Interesting expression. For whom or what is Windows taking "the fall"?
Maybe you're saying that Windows was somehow exploited for gain by
some evil genius? Really it sounds so sinister.
 
David said:
One may have been clueless when they first sat at a computer but it's a
heck of a lot easier, and more intuitive, to learn how a menu system
works than it is 'no clue given' commands on a command line.
Click to expand...

It's almost like second nature that you use the 'Start' menu to shut
down the computer.
 
Mxsmanic said:
Ruel Smith writes:




That recent article is fantasy. I look at the actual numbers first,
before I read a random author of a random article. There is absolutely
no way that 13% of the user base out there is running Linux, even
occasionally. A figure of 0.3% (one in 300 users) sounds much more
plausible.




Buzz is not the same as user base. The Mac user base eclipses the Linux
user base, with or without "buzz." For every Linux user out there,
there are about 16 Mac users.
Click to expand...

I do not know a single mac user! (that's not to say I don't know where
mac's are being used, mostly in the publishing area and I know of ppl in
publishing that hate them as well as ones who love them)) I know of a
whole school in England that moved ALL of there computers from windows
To Linux (thin clients) and I hear that some EU government's want to
switch there whole computer infrastructure to Linux based clients. The
original message I posted (well replied to) was not about Linux Vs
Windows it was about freedom of choice, why pay for some over bloated
software if you can achive the same end result for free.
 
David said:
Engineers love giving things 'cute' acronyms that need a decoder ring to
decipher ...
Click to expand...

And UNIX is king in this domain. I still don't understand why the
command to display a file is called "cat."
All of these are solvable, 'explainable', things, but it adds up.
Click to expand...

Microsoft has spent a lot more time studying ergonomics than anyone
working on Linux ever has (apparently).
 
Matt said:
If any viruses were able to survive in a hypothetical Linux-dominated
internet, we would have seen them bring down a few large homogeneous
Linux networks. I haven't seen that.
Click to expand...

Be careful what you wish for.

There aren't too many viruses bringing down homogenous CP/M networks,
either.
Note also that antivirus programs for Linux viruses are practically
unknown.
Click to expand...

All the more reason to worry.
 
Matt said:
It seems much less burdensome under Linux than under Windows to use an
unpriveleged account.
Click to expand...

Linux has a much more primitive security model than Windows.
After all, the concepts of 'user' and file ownership are retrofitted
to Windows and My Computer.
Click to expand...

This is incorrect. Windows versions derived from NT have user and file
concepts built directly in the OS, and the security model is far more
advanced than that used by Linux (or UNIX).
 
JD said:
I do not know a single mac user!
Click to expand...

I know several. So what?
I know of a whole school in England that moved ALL of there
computers from windows To Linux (thin clients) ...
Click to expand...

So what?
... and I hear that some EU government's want to
switch there whole computer infrastructure to Linux based clients.
Click to expand...

Why don't they just throw taxpayer money out the window? It would be
faster and the result wouldn't be as painful.
The
original message I posted (well replied to) was not about Linux Vs
Windows it was about freedom of choice, why pay for some over bloated
software if you can achive the same end result for free.
Click to expand...

Why indeed?

The problem is that such a choice does not currently exist. Nothing can
replace Windows for many Windows users. And Windows isn't really
bloated. In fact, a Windows GUI runs faster on a given hardware
platform than a Linux GUI, because so much of the Windows GUI is built
into the OS.
 
charles said:
It's a USA advertising figure that apparently you are not aware of.
Maybe someone else can explain it.
Click to expand...

I know what it is. But I also know that the advertising claims are
largely true: most Maytags never need maintenance. They certainly don't
need any other kind of support. They just work.

Then again, even cheap washing machines often manage that.
 
your talking a home situation, WTH that setup is being used at home for, is
beyond me. In the world in which security is a necessity, and not egomania,
the user interface works as good as the administrator that sets it.

15 posts ago you typed a paragraph that hit the nail on the
head...developmental stupidity.... now your bashing again...... eat more
fiber and stay regular
 
Mxsmanic said:
John Doe writes:
Forget [the command line interface], I tell my computer what to
do, with my voice.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Must be tough when you're entering regular expressions.
Click to expand...

Give me your favorite regular expression and I will show you how
it's done.

I won't live in the past. My goal has always been to make my
personal computer do anything and everything it can do. User
interfaces will continue to progress as technology progresses. That
is a fact that anyone should be able to see. Even if you live in the
Third World, your technology improves over time.

Besides typing which I mostly no longer have to do (yeah!), one of
my favorite applications for speech is opening programs. It seems
simple, but it is fun. I no longer have to reserve space for an
icon, I just say "open notes" or "open data folder" or "open
browser". Anything I would have to hunt for or spell out is now
instantly accessible. It is similar to the difference between
hunting and pecking on a typewriter versus touch typing.

Speech recognition can be extremely frustrating, but sooner or later
it will be usable by most people.
 
Mxsmanic said:
David Maynard writes:




And UNIX is king in this domain. I still don't understand why the
command to display a file is called "cat."
Click to expand...

Hehe. Yes, well, it stands for "concatenate" (files and print on the
standard output). And the standard output will be the screen unless redirected.

Many people think the 'small' names are to make them faster to type but the
real reason is that UNIX goes way back to the days even before 640K really
was 'more than anyone would ever need'. 640K was a pipe dream and a maxed
out minicomputer had between 32KByte to 64KByte of RAM with pizza platter
sized hard drives holding 1.2 meg. And it took more than 10 grand to get one.

It saved memory.

Microsoft has spent a lot more time studying ergonomics than anyone
working on Linux ever has (apparently).
Click to expand...

Yeah. That was the point I was going the long way around making.

I think it's getting better but for an awfully long time the Linux
community seemed to regard 'windowing' as little more than 'decoration'.
But that isn't terribly surprising because the audience UNIX, the daddy
Linux cloned from, aimed at was never 'clueless consumers'. It was, as the
saying went, an O.S. "of the programmer, by the programmer, and for the
programmer." Or, put in more modern terms, it would be an O.S. "of the
geek, by the geek, and for the geek."
 
Mxsmanic said:
charles writes:




I know what it is. But I also know that the advertising claims are
largely true: most Maytags never need maintenance. They certainly don't
need any other kind of support. They just work.
Click to expand...

Yep. I think part of the problem here is the definition of 'support'. One
can say that repair is a 'support' function but that isn't the kind of
'support' we're talking about with computer help desks and I don't know of
anyone who calls into a 'support desk' to get instructions on how to
operate their dryer.
 
Matt said:
JD wrote:
The simple fact that there are VIRTUALLY no viruses for Linux
Click to expand...

Would have helped if you hadn't snipped out the attribution to begin with.
Of course those things are true, but their significance depends on
actual inherent weaknesses in Linux. So that old argument ends up
begging the question.
Click to expand...

No, it isn't begging the question because Linux vulnerabilities exist as
they do in every complex system. That was the point of the original
experiment in 1983 on UNIX and stands today for the simple fact these
things are made by imperfect human beings.

Why do you think there are always scads of 'security updates' for Linux
regardless of which version you're on?

Really it's more of an argument against Windows than against the
Unix-derived OSes: monoculture is known to compound Windows's
vulnerabilities, but the argument is almost completely speculative when
applied to Linux, Unix, and Mac.
Click to expand...

You are just dreaming.
I mean that monoculture doesn't matter if there are no actual
vulnerabilities.
Click to expand...

The biggest vulnerability is your head in the sand blind faith in something
that's been proven false.
Besides that, a hypothetical internet that is only half Windows would
have its non-Windows side divided among Red Hat, Suse, Mandrake, BSD,
Mac, and other Unixes and Linuxes. So the monoculturalism would still
be almost all on the Windows side.
Click to expand...

That is just speculation and without any basis. For example, the ability to
infect cross platform, both Linux and Windows with the same virus, has
already been demonstrated.

It seems much less burdensome under Linux than under Windows to use an
unpriveleged account.
Nonsense.

After all, the concepts of 'user' and file
ownership are retrofitted to Windows and My Computer.
Click to expand...

You apparently don't know nearly as much about 'Windows' as you think. The
'NT' platforms were designed from the ground up with user and file security
and with more security features/flexibilty than either UNIX or Linux..

Interesting expression. For whom or what is Windows taking "the fall"?
Maybe you're saying that Windows was somehow exploited for gain by
some evil genius? Really it sounds so sinister.
Click to expand...


The 'fall guy' meaning was clear from the context and you'd get it if you
put as much effort into understanding it as you do arguing.

Windows, by virtue of being the predominate O.S. over most of the market,
became the predominate target of attack since, as I've explained over and
over, if one wants to create mayhem they go for what will cause the most
mayhem. That 'paints a bulls eye' on Windows and add to that the vehemence
some have for 'Bill Gates' and 'Windows' and you have a fall guy. A nice
'excuse' to do nasty things to the rotten bas(*%^. Except they're doing it
to users.

And I hadn't even mentioned yet the other half of the equation that, with
Windows being dramatically more predominate, you have more programmers
familiar with it and more nuts familiar with it.

Really, this is like trying to explain to someone that flies like sugar and
they keep trying to argue the absurd "no they don't."
 
Back
Top