Windows versus the World: Royal Rumble I

[Dagenais]

You OTH did not read what I said about virus software being available to run on OBSD not "for" OBSD.

Well if that isn't the kettle calling the pot black. You should be the last person telling people what they didn't read. In the last thread, you just linked us to an article that started the whole argument.
You basically just never bother to read links provided.
So tell us, have you actually ever used anything other than Windows for more than a month consistently?

 

[ahrkron]

A reply to a message I sent about OpenBSD. He is a Mentor at a popular OpenBSD discussion board, with 1865 posts and a member for 2 years.

I don't know, Dagenais. The fact that even "a Mentor at a popular OpenBSD discussion board" did only go as far as considering it "very likely" (clearly implying that he has never actually seen one), does strengthen Chroot's case, not yours.

Actually, your post also shows that you have been looking for information on this on (at least) one BSD-specific board, and that so far you have come out without a single name for a virus affecting BSD, which is what chroot challenged you to provide.

I'm no expert on this, but if I had to bet on it, I'd go with Chroot.

 

[faust9]

Well if that isn't the kettle calling the pot black. You should be the last person telling people what they didn't read. In the last thread, you just linked us to an article that started the whole argument.
You basically just never bother to read links provided.
So tell us, have you actually ever used anything other than Windows for more than a month consistently?

What in god's name are you talking about? I NEVER LINKED TO ANY ARTICLES IN MY THREADS[/size]. YOU linked to three propaganda articles to which I QUOTED your post. You can tell a quote because they are shifted to the right, shaded some color (blue in my case), and headed by the word "quote". So, if you REREAD the thread you'll find that I referenced YOUR POST. I did not link to any articles. This just adds more validity to my statement that you did not read my post. Go figure killer. You didn't read it in the first place and your flying off the hande based on ideas pulled from the ether. If you reread my post you'll see that I did read your links and responded that they were programs which run on BSD servers that look for virii associated with other OS's, not BSD. My assertion was exactly the same as what chroot said just a little more diplomatic.

Let me say this again, I NEVER LINKED TO ANY ARTICLES--YOU DID! I know the difference between a program that runs on an OS used to filter virii for other OS's vice a program designed to find and elliminate virii for the OS which the program is running on. You shouldn't make assertions about someones computer proficiency when you seem to be deficient.

Too funny there killer. Keep on beating the dead horse and lashing out with ad-homanum attacks instead of addressing the issues while the rest of us engage in intelligent discussion.

 

[Dagenais]

Actually, your post also shows that you have been looking for information on this on (at least) one BSD-specific board, and that so far you have come out without a single name for a virus affecting BSD, which is what chroot challenged you to provide.

How does that go with him?

If it was for Chroot, it would be, "It's very likely that one DOESN'T exist", not "does." In other words, he is in agreeance with me. He is saying that viruses ARE likely in existence, as opposed to AREN'T in Chroot's case.

It's god damn common sense. You could right a perl script right now to delete files in the HD and call it a virus, then attempt to spread it.

Chroot is going for the "doesn't exist" part - which is untrue since there has to be one out there.

Can he show me a legite article that claims a virus has never been on OpenBSD?

Let me say this again, I NEVER LINKED TO ANY ARTICLES--YOU DID!

Awesome. Wait until Dduardo cleans up the other thread, then claim you never did something.

Are you by any chance American? (Clinton)

while the rest of us engage in intelligent discussion.

Intelligent? That cannot be you.

I NEVER LINKED TO ANY ARTICLES IN MY THREADS.

Go pound your keyboard in Caps lock in another post. This isn't IRC Captain Caps.

 

[chroot]

You could right a perl script right now to delete files in the HD and call it a virus

That's not a virus. That's a script.

- Warren

 

[The_Professional]

Chroot is going for the "doesn't exist" part - which is untrue since there has to be one out there.

I admit, I wrote one because I'm evil 31337 haX0rzz

 

[faust9]

Awesome. Wait until Dduardo cleans up the other thread, then claim you never did something.

To what is this referring to? Are you insinuating my posts here were edited by a moderator to remove a link? Are you insinuating I've participated in other threads where my links were edited or removed by a moderator? If you are, then I think your woefully mistaken.

Talk about a big chip on the shoulder there guy.


Anyway, I'm going to keep singing the praises of OSX (built on BSD). I'm going to keep telling people to give Gentoo a try if they want a good idea what goes on under the linux hood, or try LFS if they want an even better idea. And finally, I'm going to go into my wifes office every day or two and reboot her XP computer. Moreover, I'll probably dig out my old Amiga 2K once a year just for nostalgia.

Oh if you wanted to argue the existence of a BSD virus you would've had a better chance looking into the handful of virii plaguing OSX. OSX is a BSD derivative. Look to see if you find any kernel (the BSD core of OSX) exploits though the existence of an OS X virus doesn't necessarly mean a true BSD virus is out ther stalking you in the file tree of an old solaris server.

 

[Dagenais]

That's not a virus. That's a script.

That's funny, because it was an example given by the OpenBSD mentor.

And it does the job of a virus - terrorize.

Why don't you simply admit you exaggerated? Anyone with common sense can see that.

 

[ShawnD]

Dag, a virus is not something that "terrorizes". A virus is something that replicates its own code. Something that just does destruction is usually called a trojan.

Looks like Windows could use some help here so I'll side with Windows.

Windows is a better OS because it's more usable. Linux is able to do more stuff, but everything it can do is very difficult to do. For example, try networking a bunch of computers in Linux. You'll find yourself reading the manual for hours just trying to figure out how to make it work. With Windows, just go to Control Panel >> Network Connections, then click on "Set up a home or small office network" and boom you're on your way. Do that to every Windows computer in the network and you setup a great network - easily. After that, try to setup a network drive. In Linux, you're back in the manual reading how to do it. With Windows, open Windows Explorer, go to file >> my network places >> map network drive. Just browse to the shared folder you want mapped as a drive then click OK.
Now try to setup a network printer. With Linux you're back reading the manual. With Windows, go to Control Panel >> Printers and Faxes >> add printer, select network printer, and it will display all detected printers on computers in the network.

Windows is better because programs can be installed by just double clicking. I download a file, I double click it, it installs. With Linux, I have to try to compile the program before installing it. Most of the time, compiling it goes smoothly, but sometimes you'll get errors saying you are missing dependencies. So then you go to download the dependency. When you try to compile it, it says you are missing another dependency. You get the other dependency and it needs another one. When I tried to install WINE on Mandrake 8.2, I had to track down 4 different dependencies. The fourth one I got (which was needed by the third one), wouldn't even compile properly saying my version of GNU compiler was wrong. I got an error that said something like "your version of GNU is 2.2, Bison will only compile on version 2.2". Well that's just great, a program that says I have the wrong version but the version I have is the only version it will work with.
That was the same day I formatted and put Windows back on.

Windows is better because each version of Windows is basically the same. If I download a program and try to install it, it will work no matter what version of Windows I have. The problem with Linux is that each distro is slightly different. The Dev folder may be in a different place, some lib folders are here instead of there. It's minor differences between distributions that make it impossible to release program as self-installing files. Some programs are install files such as OpenOffice or Mozilla, but at least 90% of the programs for Linux must be manually compiled. As said before, compiling doesn't always work.

Windows is better because people are more willing to help you when you have a problem.
If you go to a Linux forum like LinuxQuestions.org, you'll notice a lot of people saying "just RTFM" and not offering any real help. When people post questions about Windows, it's very rare that somebody replies RTFM.



I'll post again when I've thought of some other things to say

 

[Dagenais]

A virus is something that replicates its own code. Something that just does destruction is usually called a trojan.

A virus usually is made to terrorize or damage computer systems. I'm focusing on destructive viruses and the fact that they do not just exist on Windows. The simple virus does copy itself over and over, but it is usually dangerous because it quickly takes up memory halting and terrorizing the system. Thanks for clearing it up though, and I meant virus.

Glad to see more than just 2 people take the side of Windows, considering it has around 93% of the OS population, yet so few loyal users and so many haters.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Windows is a better OS because it's more usable. Linux is able to do more stuff, but everything it can do is very difficult to do. For example, try networking a bunch of computers in Linux. You'll find yourself reading the manual for hours just trying to figure out how to make it work. With Windows, just go to Control Panel >> Network Connections, then click on "Set up a home or small office network" and boom you're on your way.

that is the worst argument for windows I have ever heard. Just because you have to write some command lines instead of clicking all over Control Panel does not mean it's easy. not to mention reebooting windows to apply changes. After the first time you can write the commands in a script and execute it so yopu don't have to read the manual pages every time...

Now try to setup a network printer. With Linux you're back reading the manual. With Windows, go to Control Panel >> Printers and Faxes >> add printer, select network printer, and it will display all detected printers on computers in the network.

I got four letters for you - CUPS

Windows is better because programs can be installed by just double clicking. I download a file, I double click it, it installs. With Linux, I have to try to compile the program before installing it. Most of the time, compiling it goes smoothly, but sometimes you'll get errors saying you are missing dependencies. ...

I admit that's true. but there also exists rpms if you want to avoid compiling... although they can be a real pain too sometimes

Windows is better because each version of Windows is basically the same. If I download a program and try to install it, it will work no matter what version of Windows I have.

you are so right here nothing ever changes in windows

Windows is better because people are more willing to help you when you have a problem.
If you go to a Linux forum like LinuxQuestions.org, you'll notice a lot of people saying "just RTFM" and not offering any real help. When people post questions about Windows, it's very rare that somebody replies RTFM.

sadly this is true for both sides. The help from MS sound like: "upgrade to the latest version of..." "please reinstall your ..." while on linux forums there are so many people that came there just to laugh at the guys searching for help...

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Glad to see more than just 2 people take the side of Windows, considering it has around 93% of the OS population, yet so few loyal users and so many haters.

yes remeber those times when 93% of the world population said the Earth was flat. ah, the good old inquisition ...

 

[ShawnD]

Guybrush, when do you ever need to restart Windows? I've only ever had to do that after making critical changes such as updating video drivers or updating windows. New networks can be added, new drives, new printer, new camera can all be added without rebooting.

Even Linux needs to be rebooted when you change video drivers.

 

[dduardo]

ShawnD, no you don't need to reboot your computer when you update your video drivers. All you do is drop into runlevel 3 (command: telinit 3) into the console, run the script that installs the drivers(command: ./NVIDIA_blah_blah_blah), then load the module into the kernel (command: modprobe nvidia). You can check to see if it was added by doing (command: lsmod). Finally go back to runlevel 5 (command: telinit 5) and your done.

Believe it or not, but there is a feature in the new kernel (2.6.x) where you can hot swap processors without rebooting. I want to see Windows do that!

 

[ShawnD]

It takes more time to shut down X, type in those commands, and restart X than it does to simply restart a Windows computer.

 

[faust9]

No it doesn't. A simple startx takes about 15 seconds, on my tired old computer, of which 5 are spent showing the nVidia green eye. How many times have you had to shut down your system after installing a piece of new software? In fact, the only piece of hardware I've had to shut my crappy PII 333 down after installing the module for was the vortex II based soundcard.

As far as installing software goes, I uses gentoo so installing software is fairly easy. The only problem is waiting for the software to compile. I ran Debian prior to Gentoo, and apt-get was easy enough to use. Yast is a little slow but still its easy. Mandrakes software installer from what I understand is pretty straight forward also. A lot of people fault linux for software installation issues, but in all reality software installation has seen big improvements since I first started using Linux. I think eventually all distros except for the truly fring ones will conform to a true standard for program locations or a least a standard repository of simlinks. Heck, maybe will be dumbed down as much as my iBook is.

Personally, I don't hate Windows. I just like *nix a little better. Sure I don't have the huge reposatory of games as the doze fans do, but I don'y play games anyway. I am comfortable in the fact that my financial records won't be spread to every computer terminal from here to Timbucktoo because my wife decided to open an e-mail attachment containing a new virus (my wholesale migration to Linux happened after that very thing happened to me in late 2001).

One thing I will say is that XP starts up quicked from a reboot than my Linux computer. Ahh, oh well. I'm too lazy to rectify that situation and the flip side of the coin is my Linux computer is almost never turned off.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

it may take more time but at least most of the other Linux services keep running.

I think most of the windows fans can't make a simple distinction between operating system and application. The scope of an OS is to allow users and applications to use the hardware underneath (it may seem strange to some people but you actually need the hardware to get a job done ). Also the OS must separate each user and application and not let them step on each other. The scope of an OS IS NOT to have applications bundled in so when an application crash the whole system crashes, or when an application changes some settings the whole system must restart to take effect.

So yes maybe Win can restart more quicly than I can blink but that doesn't prove anything because the OS is not suposed to restart unless maybe the hardware configuration on which is running must be changed...

 

[ShawnD]

it may take more time but at least most of the other Linux services keep running.

That's an excellent point.

The scope of an OS IS NOT to have applications bundled in so when an application crash the whole system crashes

Please stick to current operating systems. I'm not throwing Linux versions from 10 years ago in your face so don't throw 6 year old versions of Windows in my face.

faust, the only programs I've ever seen that require a restart are firewalls. Sygate and Zone Alarm have to tie into the system somehow but they also have to monitor which programs try to access the internet as that program is starting. Other than firewalls, drivers, and anything that changes system files, there are no other programs that require you to restart windows.

I find it funny that nobody has mentioned Mac OS; the system that was once a major player.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Please stick to current operating systems. I'm not throwing Linux versions from 10 years ago in your face so don't throw 6 year old versions of Windows in my face.

what's that supose to mean? aren't IE and WMP so tightly integrated with Windows that they can't be removed? what has a 10 year old linux or windows has to do with the definition of an operating system?

 

[ShawnD]

You said that when a program in Windows crashes, it brings the whole system down. That hasn't been true for a good 4 years.
WMP crashes all the time and it never brings Windows down. When explorer crashes, it boots up again; nothing crashes with it.

Programs bringing the system down only happened in 95, 98, and ME. Those are truly the 3 worst operating systems ever created. 98SE crashed so much that I started to keep a log (pencil and paper of course, the computer could not be trusted). 98SE (with all updates) crashed an average of 3 times PER DAY!
Right Now I have XP on all 4 computers in my house. The only crashes that have happened were caused by a bad motherboard.

 

[Dagenais]

that is the worst argument for windows I have ever heard. Just because you have to write some command lines instead of clicking all over Control Panel does not mean it's easy. not to mention reebooting windows to apply changes.

It's a perfect argument. Instead of typing away on the command line, you can do the same job using the GUI.

That's what made the first Apple popular.

yes remeber those times when 93% of the world population said the Earth was flat. ah, the good old inquisition ...

They didn't pay $99.99 or $299.99 to say that.

And I'm talking about correctness when saying that, I'm talking about user loyalty. Since 93% of the computer population use it plus their other products, continually b*itching about it they still end up paying for the products and using them.

If I bought a car, printer, TV etc. that I hated, I certainly would not buy it again.

If I did, then I probably like the product.

Even Linux needs to be rebooted when you change video drivers.

Macs do too. They reboot after major software updates in Jaguar as well.

Timbucktoo because my wife decided to open an e-mail attachment containing a new virus

That would be your wife's fault, not Windows.

Another example of Windows getting blamed. Rarely do Unix users open up unknown attachments.

aren't IE and WMP so tightly integrated with Windows that they can't be removed?

No, the new service pack is suppose to fix that.

Programs bringing the system down only happened in 95, 98, and ME. Those are truly the 3 worst operating systems ever created.

95, 98 isn't as bad as you think. I used Macs back then as well and they were also highly unstable.

Back then, I'd take the compatibility of 95 over Classic Mac OS on any day. I've never seen the mid-90's version of Linux so I can't make a comment on that but I can't imagine it being much greater.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

If I bought a car, printer, TV etc. that I hated, I certainly would not buy it again.

If I did, then I probably like the product.

or had no other CHOICE. when I will go to any computer store and can choose any OS to be shipped with my new computer then I will have a CHOICE.

That would be your wife's fault, not Windows.

Another example of Windows getting blamed. Rarely do Unix users open up unknown attachments.

oh yes almost forgot the windows best defence - the user did it. No excuses because they made it possible for worms to spread through email, just blame the clueless users...

No, the new service pack is suppose to fix that.

so tell me why should I trust a company who's owner said that 640k RAM will be all a programmer would ever need and now ships an OS that can't fit in 1G and not trust kernel code I can read?

 

[MythioS]

I think the GUI was a good point though. I mean what is linux trying to be.
I've skimmed through linux msg forums b4 where they don't even seem to care about the casual computer user and say that 'well linux isn't made for games, its a server OS'.

Performance wise i didnt see any improvement with the GUI for linux then i did with windows. A friend of mine installed mandrake 9.0 and it was just as sluggish as windows.

Of course i mentioned this to a linux buff n he was like well who needs a gui anyways... ok true, who does need one. Ohh I don't know only 90% of the ppl.

I could install DOS if i didnt want a GUI.

Linux is more secure cus all these script kiddy hackers don't bother to write mosts virus' to be compatable with linux, not b/c linux is actually more secure.

The OS' job is there to run your computer, not be a security officer for peoples stupidity.

 

[ShawnD]

Last version of Linux I tried was Mandrake 8.2. Although KDE does take up resources, I found it a lot more responsive than Windows.
Windows has a hard time with hard drive lag. I'll be doing basically nothing and the hard drive light on my computer is on. I try to open Windows Explorer and it takes 10 seconds to load because Windows is having fun using the hard drive for no reason. Sometimes the computer just seems to lag incredibly bad, so I go to task manager and see that System Idle Process is using 90% CPU power even though I'm not doing anything. It's like Windows is skeeting on me, just to mock me.
Hard drive lag and System Idle Process suck

Programs that run on Linux also seem to run a lot faster. I used to run a Team Fortress Classic server. HLDS (half-life dedicated server) on Windows XP Home would take upwards of 20% of an Athlon 1700+. When I had that server on Mandrake 8.2, it only took around 3% CPU power. That still amazes me.
Linux's speed is why Linux is used on most computers that simply do calculations. The computers in the chem department at University of Alberta automatically reboot into Linux at 7PM IIRC and start doing chemistry calculations.

 

[Dagenais]

or had no other CHOICE. when I will go to any computer store and can choose any OS to be shipped with my new computer then I will have a CHOICE.

Go to Wal-mart, they have computers running Linux. Or CompUSA, they sell computers running Mac OS X Panther. That's 2 major distributors in the USA.

If you live in Canada, head to Future Shop, they have Macs selling there along with Windows. London Drugs offer loads of Macs.


You have a choice. There are plenty of oppurtunities given by large distributors to buy something other than Macs. That "Choice" thing is just BS when the biggest distributors in both the US and Canada offer choices.

No excuses because they made it possible for worms to spread through email, just blame the clueless users...

Don't open up Email attachements from strangers. Common sense.

 

[MythioS]

Oh no i doubt doubt that linux is available I am just concerned with how much is being done to make it 'usable'.

The whole scream use to be, 'Yes, finally something other then windows' and now were left wondering if linux will ever amount to much for games, etc.

Your lucky to even find an average user knowing what DOS, not this alternative which its only defense is using it at a prompt.. i dunno.

I just hope more games move to linux, otherwise i never have a reason to really switch.

 

[ShawnD]

I just hope more games move to linux, otherwise i never have a reason to really switch.

You don't have to switch entirely. I'm planning on doing a dual boot; I've had all the hard drive lag I can take (it took 5 minutes to load this page after I clicked the link in my email). I'm going to use Windows for games and Linux for everything else. I've finally found replacements for all the programs I use.
emule --> xmule
trillian --> gaim
winamp --> xmms (comes with most distros)
outlook --> kmail
ms office --> open office

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Go to Wal-mart, they have computers running Linux. Or CompUSA, they sell computers running Mac OS X Panther. That's 2 major distributors in the USA.
If you live in Canada, head to Future Shop, they have Macs selling there along with Windows. London Drugs offer loads of Macs.

I don't live in Canada or USA (it sais so right under my name on the left though) and here all we have is Windows on every computer. And I said any OS. All I want is the same choice I get for computer parts. I can buy a processor from Intel , AMD or Transmeta at a large range of frequency. I want a full list of OSes from Win to FreeBSD.

You have a choice.

YOU have a choice because the people from the Open Source Community fought for it. The world is not just Canada and SUA...

Don't open up Email attachements from strangers. Common sense.

you just open a new bussiness and a lot of strangers sent you CVs and bussiness oportunities. What do you do? oh, yes don't open them...

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

ms office --> open office

well open office kinda sucks, better try and configure wine to run MS office...

 

[ShawnD]

I tried. Word can run, but Excel causes wine to crash.