For all you Linux haters
-
Chris Losinger wrote: i don't know if you are an anti-Linux zealot or not I try not to be, but as my livelyhood is in developing .NET applications for Windows I try and defend Windows. I try and take a balanced approach and I was just wondering if any of my recent comments stepped in to the zealot camp.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
Interestingly enough, although I am a Windows programmer I have recently started reading a book about the Linux Kernel (Understanding the Linux Kernel, 2nd Edition), to gain some insight. The article states that there are 2 major differences in Linux and Windows, and the first is security. We all know how well Windows handles that! A single wayward user process can corrupt a whole machine, because it is almost impossible to use Windows without being an administrator or a "power user". On the other hand, on Linux, a user process can only damage a very limited amount, and no part of the operating system. The second difference is in Window handling. Linux made a bold choice to make the OS more flexible, and secure, although there were performance compromises. Sure, Windows has the upper hand in terms of Windowing performance, but on the latest processors, that margin is about gone. Architecturally, the kernels may be similar, but no current version of Windows can boot off of a 1.4 inch floppy. (Yes that is possible with Linux). Certainly, there is no recent version of Windows that boots off of a normal CD, and allows full Windowing functionality with a complete set of MS Office applications. Knoppix can. The point being, that as developers we should respect the architectural choices of the Linux programmers. They made the right choices in terms of making an OS that was flexible and powerful. Windows programmers were driven by money, which is not wrong, but led them to make choices that led to a lot of today's security problems.
Steven Campbell wrote: because it is almost impossible to use Windows without being an administrator or a "power user". Really? I use my home machine from "User" accounts all the time except when installing some software. If a program cannot work without admin privileges, I don't use it. Period. As for Linux, it actualy has poorer security mechanisms than Windows (no ACLs, for instance), but the higher technical level of Linux users in practice make it more secure.
-
Chris Losinger wrote: i don't know if you are an anti-Linux zealot or not I try not to be, but as my livelyhood is in developing .NET applications for Windows I try and defend Windows. I try and take a balanced approach and I was just wondering if any of my recent comments stepped in to the zealot camp.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: and I was just wondering if any of my recent comments stepped in to the zealot camp. Don't worry, I have yet to see you in that camp ;) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!" ShotKeeper, my Photo Album / Organizer Application[^]
My Photos[^] New developersite: RealDevs.Net -
I think most Windows developers wish Linux the best. We all understand that competition is a good thing. The sore spot we all have with Linux is not so much the technology as it is the politics that the Linux side can't seem to free itself. The very minute I can create applications for as wide a range of customers with Linux, or any other operating system, that I can with Windows, is the very minute I will begin using it. But it will be about technology, not politics.
Well said!!! Stan Shannon wrote: The very minute I can create applications for as wide a range of customers with Linux, or any other operating system, that I can with Windows, is the very minute I will begin using it. But it will be about technology, not politics. Hopefully, MONO for Linux will give us that... Does anybody know if someone's working on a Mac or OS/2 port, or any other OS? Kyosa Jamie Nordmeyer - Cho Dan Portland, Oregon, USA
-
I think most Windows developers wish Linux the best. We all understand that competition is a good thing. The sore spot we all have with Linux is not so much the technology as it is the politics that the Linux side can't seem to free itself. The very minute I can create applications for as wide a range of customers with Linux, or any other operating system, that I can with Windows, is the very minute I will begin using it. But it will be about technology, not politics.
Stan Shannon wrote: I think most Windows developers wish Linux the best. We all understand that competition is a good thing. The sore spot we all have with Linux is not so much the technology as it is the politics that the Linux side can't seem to free itself. The very minute I can create applications for as wide a range of customers with Linux, or any other operating system, that I can with Windows, is the very minute I will begin using it. But it will be about technology, not politics. Linux needs Visual Basic :-D But I do agree (and there are Frozen Flying Pigs from Hell outside my window to prove it :-))
-
Stan Shannon wrote: I think most Windows developers wish Linux the best. We all understand that competition is a good thing. The sore spot we all have with Linux is not so much the technology as it is the politics that the Linux side can't seem to free itself. The very minute I can create applications for as wide a range of customers with Linux, or any other operating system, that I can with Windows, is the very minute I will begin using it. But it will be about technology, not politics. Linux needs Visual Basic :-D But I do agree (and there are Frozen Flying Pigs from Hell outside my window to prove it :-))
Ian Darling wrote: and there are Frozen Flying Pigs from Hell outside my window to prove it :laugh: I do believe in the separation of politics and technology!
-
Steven Campbell wrote: the first is security. We all know how well Windows handles that! About as well as (or as bad as) Linux as far as I can see. Linux is not immune to security issues because it is built by software developers and software developers are human, and humans make errors sometimes. Steven Campbell wrote: because it is almost impossible to use Windows without being an administrator or a "power user". This is really a cofiguration issue. You can run in windows in a perfectly acceptable manner as a less privileged user. You can use "Run As..." in order to run a process as the Administrator if need be, just like Linux can spawn processes running as root if need be. Steven Campbell wrote: 1.4 inch floppy I'm being facetious with this but: A 1.4" floppy disk?! Wow, I never knew they made them so small. Steven Campbell wrote: The point being, that as developers we should respect the architectural choices of the Linux programmers. They made the right choices in terms of making an OS that was flexible and powerful I don't think we should look as this as right and wrong. They made a choice to use Linux, we've (mostly) made a choice to use Windows. I happen to think that the Windows OS is flexible and powerful - It has served me well over the years and I find it has been able to do everything I've asked of it. Probably if I was developing for Linux I would say the same thing about that as well. Steven Campbell wrote: Windows programmers were driven by money, which is not wrong, but led them to make choices that led to a lot of today's security problems. Way back when I started my career my choice which was "driven by money" was because that is what put food on my table. I set up a company that delivered a Windows based product because that is what the world used. If I had build a Unix based (this was in the days before Linux) product we wouldn't have got far - expecially as the prime goal was to make the application as easy to use as possible for the end user. Today's security problems in Windows are no worse pro-rata than those security problems in Linux. If it gains market leadership you will find it is attacked just as much as Windows is today. Because it will become a big target as it is easier to shoot at a bigger target than a smaller one.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will j
Steven Campbell wrote:
1.4 inch floppy I bet Freud would have a field day with that one! Regarding my statement about "money", I was referring to Microsoft being driven by money, and that drive causing different choices than the more altruistic motivations of Linus Torvalds etc. I could have stated that better to avoid misunderstanding. Colin wrote:
Today's security problems in Windows are no worse pro-rata than those security problems in Linux. If it gains market leadership you will find it is attacked just as much as Windows is today. Because it will become a big target as it is easier to shoot at a bigger target than a smaller one. It is a common argument, and a valid one. The common counter-argument is that it is the severity of the problems that would be different. For example, a bug in the Mozilla browser could cause problems, but those problems would not affect other user accounts, nor would it affect the OS itself. The same cannot be said of a browser flaw in IE. Similar, more relevant examples could be made when comparing IIS on a Windows server to Apache on Linux or FreeBSD.
-
I think most Windows developers wish Linux the best. We all understand that competition is a good thing. The sore spot we all have with Linux is not so much the technology as it is the politics that the Linux side can't seem to free itself. The very minute I can create applications for as wide a range of customers with Linux, or any other operating system, that I can with Windows, is the very minute I will begin using it. But it will be about technology, not politics.
Stan Shannon wrote: the politics that the Linux side can't seem to free itself I have the same problem with Windows-evangelists and Mac-heads. So tiresome. OS-es are just OS-es, and it would be a crappy developer that couldn't write for another one.
-
Steven Campbell wrote:
1.4 inch floppy I bet Freud would have a field day with that one! Regarding my statement about "money", I was referring to Microsoft being driven by money, and that drive causing different choices than the more altruistic motivations of Linus Torvalds etc. I could have stated that better to avoid misunderstanding. Colin wrote:
Today's security problems in Windows are no worse pro-rata than those security problems in Linux. If it gains market leadership you will find it is attacked just as much as Windows is today. Because it will become a big target as it is easier to shoot at a bigger target than a smaller one. It is a common argument, and a valid one. The common counter-argument is that it is the severity of the problems that would be different. For example, a bug in the Mozilla browser could cause problems, but those problems would not affect other user accounts, nor would it affect the OS itself. The same cannot be said of a browser flaw in IE. Similar, more relevant examples could be made when comparing IIS on a Windows server to Apache on Linux or FreeBSD.
Steven Campbell wrote: I was referring to Microsoft being driven by money As are all companies including companies that are distributing Linux. Steven Campbell wrote: that drive causing different choices than the more altruistic motivations of Linus Torvalds Not really, Microsoft started off by taking an existing OS and modifying it. Torvalds started off by taking an existing OS and modifying it. Hmmmm.... Sounds pretty similar doesn't it. Steven Campbell wrote: For example, a bug in the Mozilla browser could cause problems, but those problems would not affect other user accounts How can you know that? I've seen on the Linux Security advisories web site enough security flaws in linux that result the the theft of password lists. That flaw combined with a buffer overflow that allows code injection is all that is needed to take full control of a Linux box. And the majority of flaws are to do with buffer overruns. At the moment I don't accept the argument that Linux is any safer than Windows. Quite simply it is not a big enough target for hackers to be as rigorously tested as Windows. I still feel if it gained more market share it would be attacked more and more flaws would flow out of the woodwork.
"You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar The Second EuroCPian Event will be in Brussels on the 4th of September Can't manage to P/Invoke that Win32 API in .NET? Why not do interop the wiki way! My Blog
-
This will definately get your fingers typing......flame me now :suss: Linux and Windows Kernel are almost identical, except for message hadling and security Discovery consist of seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought -- Albert Szent-Györgyi Name the greatest of all the inventors: accident --Mark Twain
Silly article. A Volvo and a Dodge pickup are both cars. -- Ich bin Joachim von Hassel, und ich bin Pilot der Bundeswehr. Welle: Erdball - F104-G Starfighter