Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread

Originally Posted by fido_dogstoyevsky Microsoft are testing the waters before relicencing windows under the GPL?

It looks like no-one told Bill Gates about that. What was that I remember seeing quoted from him, oh that's right; "If you want to use my software, I expect you to pay for it". Well, it looks like the new CEO at M$ there might have some explaining to do with Billy...

Free stuff mostly sucks, that's why Windows is so successful.

Originally Posted by fido_dogstoyevsky Microsoft are testing the waters before relicencing windows under the GPL?

We need a LMAOROTL emoticon.

Originally Posted by YesItsMe Free stuff mostly sucks, that's why Windows is so successful.

No and no. I'm sure you would not say that OpenBSD "sucks", do you pay for that? No, you don't. The fact that something is free means that everyone can contribute to it and improve it - you can't do that with Windows unless you work for M$. So therefore things like Linux (but not limited to) allow for things like innovation that Windows by it's very proprietary nature simply doesn't - because it's a closed system.

I'll give you a prime example of that; If you use their Azure OS, even though it's a Linux distro, you still need to use Visual Basic and Windows to write code for it. But yet I can download almost (if not) ANY OTHER distro and install whatever development tools like gcc etc that I need and write then compile my code quite easily. But a M$ Linux distro, no you need to go with THEIR solution instead.

Windows is "successful" for one simple reason; M$ was very clever in making agreements with all the major PC manufacturers, that they would pre-load a copy of Windows on to at least every 9 out of 10 new PC's they sell. Linux simply wasn't developed enough back then for it to be a serious contender. So I wouldn't make the mistake of thinking that market share has much if anything to do with how good or bad the system/software is or isn't. Ever wondered why it's Linux that's king of the supercomputer market for one? More to the point: do you really think that mission critical systems can afford to go down? Let alone the supercomputer? Well I'd say no. Linux is king in that market because it's well known to be a stable and reliable system, that historically, if nothing else, Windows has not been.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 I'm sure you would not say that OpenBSD "sucks", do you pay for that? No, you don't.

I haven't paid for Windows for a while either.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 If use their Azure OS, even though it's a Linux distro, you still need to use Visual Basic and Windows to write code for it.

I doubt that other languages are not supported.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 Linux simply wasn't developed enough back then for it to be a serious contender.

And it still is not, that's why almost nobody cares for Linux on a desktop. There are so many superior alternatives, some of which are even free (and none of which use shitstemd).

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 Ever wondered why it's Linux that's king of the supercomputer market for one?

Ever wondered why Intel chose MINIX for their Management Engine which also runs on your precious supercomputers?

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 do you really think that mission critical systems can afford to go down?

Mission critical systems which cannot afford to go down usually run on real-time operating systems (which Linux is not) or commercial Unices (which Linux will never reach).

Originally Posted by YesItsMe I haven't paid for Windows for a while either.

That may be, but it's still a pay-for system and not an open-source system, isn't it?

I doubt that other languages are not supported.

I don't think you understood what I was saying; I never said "other languages" are not supported. I said that you have to use M$ tools, if you want to develop on Azure OS. Which goes back to the points I made before. You also may want to review this too, as it's rather telling about the M$ tools you need to write your code on Azure (notice Step 1).

And it still is not, that's why almost nobody cares for Linux on a desktop. There are so many superior alternatives, some of which are even free (and none of which use shitstemd).

And that's why Linux is popular as a desktop system in places like Europe in particular, that's why there's always "newbies" coming here asking questions about running Linux? Methinks not.

Yes, exactly, there are other alternatives, including other Linux based alternatives that DON'T even use systemd. If the only thing you can say is that Linux distro's that use systemd are no good and therefore by extension Linux is no good, well then it's not much of an argument, and isn't quite correct either.

Ever wondered why Intel chose MINIX for their Management Engine which also runs on your precious supercomputers?

So? And some form of Linux is still the OS running those machines.

Mission critical systems which cannot afford to go down usually run on real-time operating systems (which Linux is not) or commercial Unices (which Linux will never reach).

So I take it you don't consider Google's, Facebook's, Twitter's, and at least a couple of world famous stock exchanges are mission critical systems then? (Just to name a few) Or are you saying Google, etc don't need their systems up to do business?

Ok, each to their own.

Linux still uses the same security model that other *nix systems do BTW.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 I don't think you understood what I was saying; I never said "other languages" are not supported.

You literally wrote that I'd have to use Visual Basic.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 And that's why Linux is popular as a desktop system in places like Europe in particular, that's why there's always "newbies" coming here asking questions about running Linux?

Newbies ask questions about Linux here because Linux is not nearly as intuitive to use as other systems are.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 Yes, exactly, there are other alternatives, including other Linux based alternatives that DON'T even use systemd.

... yet.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 So? And some form of Linux is still the OS running those machines.

Not necessarily. Real Unices are a clear second runner. But you digress. Nice try.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 So I take it you don't consider Google's, Facebook's, Twitter's, and at least a couple of world famous stock exchanges are mission critical systems then?

I consider airplanes to be mission critical systems.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 Linux still uses the same security model that other *nix systems do BTW.

Stop mixing them together. It's Linux, not Linix, even visually inferior than Unix.
What is a "security model" to you?

Freedom may be more than an opinion someday?!.
https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...ml#post5929342

New Linux crypto-miner steals your root password and disables your antivirus.

So much better than Windows.

Since this is a windoze vs. Linux thread, I'll bite, even though I don't use Linux Windoze is a steaming heap of dung, always was, always will be, unless microsoft chucks it out the window (no pun intended), hires some decent UX designers and re-writes from scratch. Sure it runs, it is installed everywhere, but that's because Mr. Billy flooded the market with it, not because it's any good. The focus model and overall UI is completely jacked, the update process is invasive and a badly behaving app can kill the entire OS.

Not going to get into hardware support, app availability, just that as a product, it stinks, IMHO. The only reason I "own" a copy is this laptop came with it so I could run adobe reader. No other reason.

Originally Posted by YesItsMe New Linux crypto-miner steals your root password and disables your antivirus. So much better than Windows.

oh god, that's horrible.
let's all go and install Windows on our machines.
It's so much safer.
/s

seriously, let's bisect the description in the article:

• firstly, the exploit has to get onto your system and be allowed to execute itself. how? i will not comment on this further, as the article didn't either. i guess it's possible with an unguarded web browser.
• then, it relies on one of two exploits to actually start doing things: Dirty COW (CVE-2016-5195) and CVE-2013-2094. I'll leave further web searches up to you, but suffice to say: they're all fixed in recent kernel versions
• only then could the actual cryptomining commence...

once again linux shines not because it is inherently safer, but because it's possible to fix things.

granted:
systems that do not regularly update can be affected.
maybe your toaster is being abused for cryptomining.
or your android phone.

facit:
somebody who hasn't got a very good idea about how Linux works (probably because their mind is affected by $PROPRIETARY_OS usage) is trying to spread FUD.
again.

Originally Posted by YesItsMe You literally wrote that I'd have to use Visual Basic.

OK, Visual Basic isn't just a programming language, it's also a actual program to do your coding on. To be clear: I'm NOT talking about the programming language. I'm talking about the program Visual Basic, so hopefully that clears that up.

Newbies ask questions about Linux here because Linux is not nearly as intuitive to use as other systems are.

You could say the same for many other systems, including the BSD's. So what?

... yet.

I cannot see Slackware (among others) moving to systemd anytime soon. In fact: I seriously doubt that would be in anyways good, if PV wants to keep his userbase. So good luck convincing him to move to it - cannot see it happening EVER.

Not necessarily. Real Unices are a clear second runner. But you digress. Nice try.

A "second" runner. And also, it's still not Windows, is it?

I consider airplanes to be mission critical systems.

I would hope you do, and particularly the airlines.

Stop mixing them together. It's Linux, not Linix, even visually inferior than Unix. What is a "security model" to you?

Linux is a Unix-like system whether you like it or not. It shares many aspects of UNIX itself. There are not (as far as I know) anymore "pure" UNIX systems out there.

What's a "security model" ? This. In both the Linux context as well as the BSD context, it boils down to the fact you need root permissions to make any system-wide changes.

And where does the "root" user account ultimately come from? Oh, that's right, UNIX.

Religion is a mostly vile opinion...

Wrong thread?

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 OK, Visual Basic isn't just a programming language, it's also a actual program to do your coding on. To be clear: I'm NOT talking about the programming language. I'm talking about the program Visual Basic, so hopefully that clears that up.

That program is called Visual Studio. It includes, among others (mostly web-related), the languages Visual C++, C#, F# and Visual Basic. I happen to know that because I have been working with it for two decades now. Thanks for playing.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 You could say the same for many other systems, including the BSD's. So what?

Where can I find dumb BSD questions?

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 I cannot see Slackware (among others) moving to systemd anytime soon.

Just wait for the dependencies.

Originally Posted by jsbjsb001 Linux is a Unix-like system whether you like it or not. It shares many aspects of UNIX itself.

So does Windows. In fact, Interix (which was one of the Windows NT subsystems long before Ubuntu was a thing) was even more POSIX-compatible than your precious toy system will ever be.

Originally Posted by YesItsMe That program is called Visual Studio. It includes, among others (mostly web-related), the languages Visual C++, C#, F# and Visual Basic. I happen to know that because I have been working with it for two decades now. Thanks for playing.

OK, I stand corrected. But the point remains the same either way.

Where can I find dumb BSD questions?

I'm sure you're smart enough to know that the BSD's are simply not as popular as Linux. So you're comparing apples and oranges there. And no, I'm *not* saying there is anything wrong with the BSD's either. As I agree that the popularity of a given system doesn't mean it's good or bad - it just means it's popular. So going back to my point from before: Windows isn't popular because it's a good system - it's popular because M$ signed up enough PC manufacturers to pre-load a copy of it on to at least 99% or 99-ish % of all new PC's and such.

Just wait for the dependencies.

Once again going back to the point I made before: that's the good thing about open-source software - anyone with enough knowledge can find ways around that (just like Slackware has). Fat chance of getting around that on a closed system (in relation to OS dependencies of course).

So does Windows. In fact, Interix (which was one of the Windows NT subsystems long before Ubuntu was a thing) was even more POSIX-compatible than your precious toy system will ever be.

Ok, and? I once again very seriously doubt and utterly doubt that Google for one (among many, many, many others) would be running on Linux if it was a "toy system". So whatever.