> Nothing wrong as running as root except: > > 1. Those viruses will run with root priviledge, too. You should at least > read your email as a regular user.
Fine. Can it be made to work seamlessly? What if there were a sub-root account that all apps ran in. Sort of a reverse su. > 2. You can alter crucial system files without wanting to. Is it impossible to add a checks and balances system to this? Don't admins want warnings on occasion? While not blowing their horn, MS seems to be able to create installers and other processes that can be easily modified to run without user interaction. > 3. It makes a mockery out of the concept of a multiuser computer system. How? Why should there have to be a single, all-powerful user that installs and other administration functions are limited to? Why can't a multi-user system allow all users to do as they wish with their settings? A real multi-user system should allow a user to do anything they wish with their user environment while protecting the domains of others. If I turn my install to shit I should be able to restore it from some ubiquitous backup without affecting the other users. This, oc, is a pipe dream, at least for now :) > That said, I can easily see the advantage of running always as root. I guess > Microsoft saw them, too. That's why they are so successful. MS is not successful because they understand the single-user environment. They are successful because they have no scruples in their business practices. > Joel > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users > Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL. -- Tyler Regas listmanager AT writerbase DOT com _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list - http://linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Archives,and Digests are located at the above URL.
