«

On Fri, 28 May 2004 00:55:51 +0000, gb posted:

> The ones that fare worst are those who don't have a clue on how to use
> Windows, let along Linux.
>
> It's getting boring seeing you posting 'Linux this, Linux that'. And
> judging by other responses, no one really cares, either. And, if Linux
> does come to the fore and overtake Windows, it won't be long till the
> hackers and whatever else target Linux instead of Windows and we'll see
> weekly Linux Updates, instead.
>
> gb

<YAWN> same old FUD from people that know /nothing/ about linux.
Target in /what/ way, & don't say viruses etc, that's already been
disproved.

On Fri, 28 May 2004 05:46:48 +0000, Ron Martell posted:

> michael turner <> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 28 May 2004 00:55:51 +0000, gb wrote:
>>
>>> The ones that fare worst are those who don't have a clue on how to use
>>> Windows, let along Linux.
>>>
>>> It's getting boring seeing you posting 'Linux this, Linux that'. And
>>> judging by other responses, no one really cares, either. And, if Linux
>>> does come to the fore and overtake Windows, it won't be long till the
>>> hackers and whatever else target Linux instead of Windows and we'll see
>>> weekly Linux Updates, instead.
>>
>>They already do...
>>This is the security update patch list for Mandrake 9.2:
>>http://www.mandrakesoft.com/security/advisories?dis=9.2
>
> Let's see some of these.
>
> "an issue where 3rd parties can retrieve member passwords from the server"
>
> "an exploitable bug in the cpufreq code in the Linux 2.6 kernel"
>
> "can be used to overflow malloc()ed memory in a way that can be remotely
> exploited."
>
> This is the invulnerable, invincible Linux? Something seems to be a bit
> amiss.

But not as amiss as an OS that can be knocked over by kiddyscripts!
1] AFAIK no one said linux was invulnerable or invincible. Also a lot of
the vulnerabilities apply to programs that come with linux, & not to linux
itself.
2] Not everyone runs the same programs, so some of those vulnerabilities
wouldn't apply to them.
3] In some of the linux vulnerabilities, someone would actually have to be
/physically/ present at the machine to take advantage of them.
4] All those vulnerabilities apply to Mandrake & may /not/ affect other
distributions. Having just checked my distribution security updates, I see
that they don't apply to mine.
5] In a lot of cases these vulnerabilities are patched before anyone knows
about them.

On Fri, 28 May 2004 06:28:49 +0000, Jeroen Wijnands posted:

> Ron Martell wrote:
>
>> michael turner <> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 28 May 2004 00:55:51 +0000, gb wrote:
>>>
>>>> The ones that fare worst are those who don't have a clue on how to use
>>>> Windows, let along Linux.
>>>>
>>>> It's getting boring seeing you posting 'Linux this, Linux that'. And
>>>> judging by other responses, no one really cares, either. And, if
>>>> Linux does come to the fore and overtake Windows, it won't be long
>>>> till the hackers and whatever else target Linux instead of Windows and
>>>> we'll see weekly Linux Updates, instead.
>>>
>>>They already do...
>>>This is the security update patch list for Mandrake 9.2:
>>>http://www.mandrakesoft.com/security/advisories?dis=9.2
>>
>> Let's see some of these.
>>
>> "an issue where 3rd parties can retrieve member passwords from the
>> server"
>>
>> "an exploitable bug in the cpufreq code in the Linux 2.6 kernel"
>>
>> "can be used to overflow malloc()ed memory in a way that can be remotely
>> exploited."
>>
>> This is the invulnerable, invincible Linux? Something seems to be a
>> bit amiss.
>>
>>
> Who claimed linux was invincable? Oh, hang on, you're an MVP Ron, that
> explains it.

It explains a lot!

> Well, of course there's issues with linux. I think there's two significant
> differences security wise between windows and linux - most windows users
> routinely use their system with an admin account instead of a user
> account, linux users tend not to do that. - microsoft seems very willing
> to sacrifice security for usability and dummy-friendliness.

Yes, I agree with that.

> On the other hand, I'm now looking at Windows 2003 server and I'm quite
> pleased with what I see there. It's the first version of a microsoft OS
> I've come across where you start by enabling stuff instead of disabling
> it. I especially like what they've done with IIS, that's really maturing
> now.

As long as you're /not/ running an Itanium.
Windows Server 2003 64-bit Enterprise Edition could turn your expensive
bit of hardware into a useless lump of metal!!
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=16130

On Fri, 28 May 2004 02:19:19 +0100, michael turner posted:

> On Fri, 28 May 2004 00:55:51 +0000, gb wrote:
>
>> The ones that fare worst are those who don't have a clue on how to use
>> Windows, let along Linux.
>>
>> It's getting boring seeing you posting 'Linux this, Linux that'. And
>> judging by other responses, no one really cares, either. And, if Linux
>> does come to the fore and overtake Windows, it won't be long till the
>> hackers and whatever else target Linux instead of Windows and we'll see
>> weekly Linux Updates, instead.
>
> They already do...
> This is the security update patch list for Mandrake 9.2:
> http://www.mandrakesoft.com/security/advisories?dis=9.2

However those patches may not apply to everyone running Mandrake.
It just depends what progams they have installed.

On Fri, 28 May 2004 00:57:17 +0100, michael turner posted:
<snip>
> You GNU/Linux *evangelists* are worse than the ****in' Mormons or
> Jehovah's Witnesses.

Yeah, he does get a bit much. I saw a couple of replies & posts about
linux that were clearly wrong, & IMHO they needed correcting.

--
kernel 2.6.6 / KDE 3.2.2
1GB DDR RAM /

> One has to wonder why someone would advocate Linux on a helpdesk newsgroup.
> Yes, Linux _is_ an alternative OS, but is not really suitable, IMHO, for the
> majority of users, and especially not suitable for new computer users.

It's better to start with a stable and secure operating system than to
learn computing the Microsoft way.

Linux: Read manual, install software, use computer.

Bundled Windows: Get patches from Microsoft before computer is found by
malware, install anti-virus software and update daily, install
anti-spyware software and update weekly, run anti-virus and anti-spyware
scans regularly, install third-party software for Registry fixing, and
expect frequent rebooting when Windows crashes.

There are people who spend at least two hours a day doing nothing but
downloading patches, running software scans, and trying to get Windows
to stop crashing. Many new computer users simply ignore the Microsoft
security problems and don't install the security software or patches.
Others install so much conflicting security software that Windows won't
even load. Some people have become afraid to use their computers at all.

http://www.linspire.com/lindows_mich...ves.php?id=118

Seymour B. Utts wrote:

> On Fri, 28 May 2004 00:57:17 +0100, michael turner posted:
> <snip>
>> You GNU/Linux *evangelists* are worse than the ****in' Mormons or
>> Jehovah's Witnesses.
>
> Yeah, he does get a bit much. I saw a couple of replies & posts about
> linux that were clearly wrong, & IMHO they needed correcting.
>

All I've posted is news articles from the Web. Show where correction is
needed.

--
Reliability:Speed:Security

Artemis wrote:

> TechNews wrote:
>> No. The idea here is to bring awareness of Linux to the masses of poor
>> end-users that have to survive Microsoft's train wreck on a daily basis.
>>
>> People should know that they have alternatives and don't have to be
>> trapped in the 9th ring of hell called Windows.
>
> Linux is hardly a secret.
> I don't know of anyone that needs you to save them from MS.
> Go pound your drum somewhere else.
>

I doubt that you know anyone here personally. I'm posting news articles for
anyone who may be interested. If you are not interested, you may safely
skip over to the next thread... as simple as that.


--
Reliability:Speed:Security

"TechNews" <> wrote in message
news:d986bb6eebaadd31eed2cd86ead6811a@news.1usenet .com...
> Artemis wrote:
>
> > TechNews wrote:
> >> No. The idea here is to bring awareness of Linux to the masses of poor
> >> end-users that have to survive Microsoft's train wreck on a daily
basis.
> >>
> >> People should know that they have alternatives and don't have to be
> >> trapped in the 9th ring of hell called Windows.
> >
> > Linux is hardly a secret.
> > I don't know of anyone that needs you to save them from MS.
> > Go pound your drum somewhere else.
> >
>
> I doubt that you know anyone here personally. I'm posting news articles
for
> anyone who may be interested. If you are not interested, you may safely
> skip over to the next thread... as simple as that.
>
>
> --
> Reliability:Speed:Security

Well I for one find them interesting, as a lurker in the Linux world (just
waiting for my exchange to be converted to Broadband and then goodbye
windows!)

Paul - xxx wrote:

> TechNews posted ...
>
>> In a piece today, PCWorld says Linux "may not topple the Microsoft
>> empire anytime soon
>
> One has to wonder why someone would advocate Linux on a helpdesk

Windows users need lots and lots of help; one can argue that the correct
solution is to dump windows altogether.

> newsgroup. Yes, Linux _is_ an alternative OS, but is not really suitable,
> IMHO, for the majority of users, and especially not suitable for new
> computer users.
>
>

That's were you are wrong, it IS suitable to the majority of users:
*Anyone* can go to a computer store, buy a boxed Linux distribution,
install it and enjoy everything they have come to expect. They will find a
GUI by which to access applications, surf the net, post to usene, use a
wordprocessor, a spreadsheet, a contact manager, listen to mp3's, etc.,
etc., etc.

Of course, all this without crashes, freezes, BSOD, perpetual reboots,
inexplicable performance degradation, and... did I mentioned crashes?



--
Reliability:Speed:Security