On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 01:45, Solver wrote:
> As for the permissions, no offence taken. But, you'll be very
> surprised to know that I am a sysadmin. Additionally, I often repair
> stand alone PCs. My network currently runs W2K, which I hate for
> everything except the increased security, but I'll put Windows XP on
> ASAP.
If I were you I'd wait till at least the first service pack is
released before doing a switchover. Win2K officially had about 63,000
(that's not a typo: sixty-three thousand) open bugs when it was
released. It is common practice to wait a while for bugs to be fixed
before deploying *any* major system change -- GNU/Linux included.
> Permissions are confusing, but I've succeeded to deny them
> installing of any applications, any registry access, changing
> wallpaper, and imposed a very strict password policy. I haven't
> tried to compile a Kernel - I don't know how. Which files I need to
> modify and how do I apply the changes (make install?).
http://www.mandrakeuser.org/docs/install/ has a good tutorial.
Compiling a kernel is quite easy and can be almost totally graphical.
If you're not sure about a setting, you can always find an explanation
on the Internet somewhere. That's the beauty of open source :-)
> Thus far, I believe everything I read about Linux, since my Linux
> experience obviously is to small for me to speak about anything.
> Should buy a book. Solver
Just like for anything else, there are both good and bad publications.
I wouldn't, for example, trust Microsoft or ZDNet (although a few
journalists there aren't that bad) to inform me on the GPL, just as I
wouldn't trust GM to inform me on Ford. It's just an issue on
selecting the correct sources. For books on GNU/Linux, anything by
O'Reilly is excellent. The Linux-Mandrake manual is a good read as
well. You should have an online version installed at
/usr/share/doc/mandrake/en/index.html.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sridhar Dhanapalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Solver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Linux-Mandrake Newbie List"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 4:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [newbie] No-one uses Linux, says Microsoft
>
> > On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 01:46, Solver wrote:
> > > No, no Bill's richness means little to me. Perhaps he's right,
> > > only some need to do this.
> > > Of course, I didn't buy Office XP! It's all piracy - I rarely
> > > buy something legally. I know Dragon is the leader, but haven't
> > > seen it at piracy shops. Just wondering about the Kernel. It's
> > > possible to compile, but even of Linux users, not everyone does
> > > it. Still, what majority users want is simple to use OS, that
> > > they can't screw up - while one typo in kernel can and will make
> > > you format it and reinstall.
> >
> > The beauty of the system is that you don't *have* to compile a
> > kernel. Disrro companies (like Mandrakesoft) give you binaries
> > that work just fine without any compilation at all (just like
> > Windows). If you want that added performance boost, you *can*
> > recompile a kernel. It is a very easy thing to do (even some
> > GNU/Linux books targetted at *beginners* teach it). A kernel can
> > only be compiled if you have the relevant source code, which is
> > not installed, nor is needed, by default. The root-user security
> > system, where you have to log in as root to perform administration
> > tasks, prevents most careless user errors. There is *no* such
> > protection in Windos, so *anyone* can make a blunder at *any*
> > time. Win2K, with its administrator-user system, is incredibly
> > confusing wnen it comes to user permissions. If you've ever tried
> > to manage multiple users and their privileges in Win2K you'll know
> > what I mean.
> >
> > Have you ever actually *tried* to compile a Linux kernel, or tried
> > to manage user rights and permissions? No offence, but it appears
> > to me as if you're just believing whatever you read instead of
> > actually learning from personal experience.
> >
> > So in short: You don't need to compile anything if you don't want
> > to. If you don't, GNU/Linux is little different from Windows,
> > since Windos is closed-source and hence can't be recompiled.
> > Making important system changes requires a log-in as root, forcing
> > the user to actually *think* about what they're doing (unless
> > they're stupid, in which case nobody can help them), unlike in
> > Windows.
> >
> > > Solver
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Sridhar Dhanapalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To: "Solver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Linux-Mandrake Newbie List"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 3:57 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [newbie] No-one uses Linux, says Microsoft
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 21:32, Solver wrote:
> > > > > Just as a note - I wouldn't mind if MS had my password. I
> > > > > would only mind if they could erase hard drive.
> > > >
> > > > If they had your password they COULD erase your hard drive.
> > > > They could get your e-mail, your credit card deails (if you
> > > > ever typed them into your computer) -- in fact anything they
> > > > wanted, from you. And if you didn't use a variant of NT (Win
> > > > 95/98/ME) you wouldn't even have a password. You would be left
> > > > wide-open for any script-kiddie to exploit. And if you DID use
> > > > a variant of NT, you would still be vulnerable, since
> > > > everybody knows that MS has a bad track record with bugs,
> > > > security and virii.
> > > >
> > > > > I hate when I reboot it twice a day, too.
> > > >
> > > > I reboot my computer once a week on average (i.e. I get about
> > > > a week of uptime). This rebooting is not due to any problem,
> > > > it's just because I feel like it. In my two years of using
> > > > GNU/Linux I have only had a few system crashes. Sure,
> > > > individual applications crash, but this doesn't affect the
> > > > rest of the system, and I can just restart that programme and
> > > > work as before.
> > > >
> > > > > I have Office XP, and the voice recognition really helps.
> > > > > Can't wait for it in StarOffice.
> > > >
> > > > IBM ViaVoice, which is FAR better than the voice recognition
> > > > in XP (IBM and Dragon are the best in the field), is also
> > > > available for GNU/Linux. BTW, did you actually PAY that much
> > > > money for Office XP? I can't remember when I last paid for
> > > > software (I think it was 1998, when Windows came pre-installed
> > > > on my then-new machine).
> > > >
> > > > > When I bought a PC, I was asked, do I want it's C: drive
> > > > > formatted, and said yes.
> > > > > Bill Gates said that the fact that everyone can recompile
> > > > > the source code is what he doesn't like about Linux. Perhaps
> > > > > he's right.
> > > >
> > > > Are you KIDDING?! What is wrong with being able to do that?
> > > > That has got to be Linux's greatest strength! You can compile
> > > > a kernel (or even a whole system) to suit YOUR own machine,
> > > > not some thing that MS wants you to buy to get "optimal
> > > > performance". I can customise my kernel to have what I want,
> > > > making it fully optimised for my particular combination of
> > > > hardware. For example, Mandrake's RPMs come pre-compiled for
> > > > an i586 (Pentium-class) procesors. I can squeeze a bit of
> > > > extra performance by recompiling the SRPM to an i686 binary,
> > > > since I have a Pentium II. If I have a multi-processor system,
> > > > I can compile for SMP, and take advantage of features like
> > > > multi-processor threading far better than a pre-compiled
> > > > Windows. Similarly, if I want to run GNU/Linux on a i386, I
> > > > can compile for that. What is WIndows XP optimised for? My
> > > > guess would be i686, i.e. a Pentium II or III. Try running it
> > > > on anything lower, and it will work painfully slow -- not just
> > > > because it is bloated and not designed for those processors,
> > > > but also because it is not and cannot be compiled for these
> > > > processors. Similarly, if I had an Athlon or a Pentium IV (or
> > > > an Alpha, a Power PC, a Sparc, an ARM, etc.), I could compile
> > > > my system for that processor especially, hence taking full
> > > > advantage of that particular processor. Windows, being
> > > > closed-source, cannot do this. GNU/Linux has the potential to
> > > > make use of new processor features like MMX, 3DNow! and
> > > > Streaming SIMD (AKA MMX2) far more efficiently and far better
> > > > than can Windows, or any Microsoft product for that matter.
> > > >
> > > > Did Uncle Bill actually give a reason for his concern, or do
> > > > you just believe him because he's rich?
> > > >
> > > > > Windows could be more customizable, though, even remaining
> > > > > closed-source.
> > > >
> > > > Windows can never be as configurable as GNU/Linux if it
> > > > remains closed soiurce. The best they can do is have options
> > > > (or even auto-detection) for features like MMX or multiple
> > > > processors. This doesn't mean they are (or can be) optimised
> > > > for them, though.
> > > >
> > > > > Solver
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Sridhar Dhanapalan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > To: "Solver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Linux Newbie"
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 5:03 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [newbie] No-one uses Linux, says Microsoft
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 04:48, Solver wrote:
> > > > > > > I love Microsoft. I respect Bill Gates. Not only they
> > > > > > > ain't my enemies - they are my friends. Yes, I like
> > > > > > > Linux, it's enhanced functionality and especially
> > > > > > > stability, but Microsoft were the first to do it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since when was Windows stable? And even if it is, were
> > > > > > they really the "first to do it"? As a former Windows-user
> > > > > > (yes, I've even used Win2K), I can say that Windows is the
> > > > > > most crash-prone OS I've ever come across. If it wern't
> > > > > > for the lack of applications, I would've stayed with OS/2
> > > > > > and DOS instead of switching to WIndows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe that they're doing everything the right way.
> > > > > > > Also, the monopoly situation is very good for users. You
> > > > > > > can put your file on a disk, go to a friend being sure
> > > > > > > you'll find the same Windows and Word there. The worst I
> > > > > > > could imagine is this: Windows - 40%
> > > > > > > Linux - 30%
> > > > > > > MacOS - 10%
> > > > > > > BeOS - 5%
> > > > > > > Solaris - 5%
> > > > > > > Other - 5%
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This will never happen. Windows, GNU/Linux and MacOS will
> > > > > > dominate. BeOS and Solaris, while being excellent OSs,
> > > > > > will not survive on the desktop. Solaris still has a lot
> > > > > > of life on the server, though.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Then you would be usnure as to what will you find there.
> > > > > > > If Linux user, you had to save both for Linux and
> > > > > > > Windows formats, and Mac doesn't read these disks. So,
> > > > > > > you would need to know specifically where are you going,
> > > > > > > and what the PCs are there. Each time I go to repair a
> > > > > > > PC, I'm almost sure what I'll see there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Microsoft love to create a "lock-in", or "venus flytrap"
> > > > > > situation. They entice you to use their products, and make
> > > > > > it very difficult for you to leave. MS Word's (before XP)
> > > > > > file format deliberately contains a lot of binary code,
> > > > > > making it difficult for a competitor to make an
> > > > > > import/export filter for it, and hence locking people into
> > > > > > MS Word. Internet Explorer accepts a twisted, proprietary
> > > > > > form of HTML, foring web designers to make pages that only
> > > > > > work best in IE (since it is the most widely used
> > > > > > browser). Since pages look best in IE, more people use it,
> > > > > > creating a viscous cycle.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Open standards and open file formats like W3C HTML and
> > > > > > other XML-based formats (e.g. the new OpenOffice and
> > > > > > Office XP formats) are what encourage innovation in the
> > > > > > industry, since they are fully open to everyone. The
> > > > > > StarOffice (now OpenOffice) people have done a wonderful
> > > > > > job at
> > > > > > reverse-engineering the binary MS Office formats. Parsing
> > > > > > the Office XP formats, being XML-based, has been much
> > > > > > easier for them, and has made them more competitive. With
> > > > > > open formats like this, it doesn't matter what programme
> > > > > > you use, or what platform you use. OpenOffice is shaping
> > > > > > up to be a real MS Office-killer, and it is available on a
> > > > > > multitude of platforms, including GNU/Linux and WIndows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Microsoft are responsible for what they release. They
> > > > > > > provide the product to you, and given you buy it
> > > > > > > legally, they also provide you with support, updates,
> > > > > > > etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Like these?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092434,00.h
> > > > > >tml
> > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2772328,00.h
> > > > > >tml
> > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092585,00.h
> > > > > >tml
> > > > > > http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,5092661,00.h
> > > > > >tml
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is a danger with closed-source software: you have no
> > > > > > idea what's inside. For all we know, everyone's passwords
> > > > > > are probably being forwarded to Microsoft.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > You can register at Linux Counter and
> > > > > > > others, but they won't give you that support, even
> > > > > > > though bug reporting is awesome.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can buy support from distro vendors (Mandrake, Red
> > > > > > Hat, etc.) This is just like any other software. You get
> > > > > > what you pay for. GNU/Linux is free, and you get free
> > > > > > support in the form of neewsgroups and mailing lists. If
> > > > > > you want official support, you have to pay. It still works
> > > > > > out cheaper than paying for propritary software, since
> > > > > > you're paying purely for support, not for the software.
> > > > > > You can't expect something for nothing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > And, another thing I love in Linux are the
> > > > > > > penguins. I love that they're everywhere, and one of my
> > > > > > > recompilation jobs will be to put even more penguins on
> > > > > > > their work at Linux desktop and applications. They just
> > > > > > > look cool - nice animals.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tux rulez :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also, I'd like to add that I hate to buy PC with
> > > > > > > preinstalled software. When I got one with preinstalled
> > > > > > > Windows (what I used then), the first thing I done was
> > > > > > > formatting C: and installing it myself. Now I use
> > > > > > > dual-boot W98, and Linux Mandrake. If I bought a PC with
> > > > > > > this dual boot, I'd still run Partition Magic and wipe
> > > > > > > it all, to install myself. I don't love when something
> > > > > > > is preinstalled. As a PC expert, I want to install
> > > > > > > everything myself - even if this is something I never
> > > > > > > installed. Yes, I did feel unsure installing Windows for
> > > > > > > the first time, as I also did installing Linux and BeOS
> > > > > > > for the first time. It all passes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you buy a new PC, chances are it'll have WIndows
> > > > > > pre-installed. Whether you actually use that or something
> > > > > > else doesn't matter, you are paying MS for it. Buying a
> > > > > > system without Windows can considerably lower the cost of
> > > > > > a PC (I think it is somewhere in the order of 10%).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It seems to me like you're simply believing all the FUD
> > > > > > vomited out by those at Microsoft and their allies (e.g.
> > > > > > ZDNet). There is more than one side to the coin.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Sridhar Dhanapalan.
> > > > > > "There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
> > > > > > LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
> > > > > > -- Jeremy S. Anderson
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Sridhar Dhanapalan.
> > > > "There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
> > > > LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
> > > > -- Jeremy S. Anderson
> >
> > --
> > Sridhar Dhanapalan.
> > "There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
> > LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
> > -- Jeremy S. Anderson
--
Sridhar Dhanapalan.
"There are two major products that come from Berkeley:
LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence."
-- Jeremy S. Anderson
