Posted on 07/23/2008 5:54:47 AM PDT by twntaipan
When you buy a new PC today, unless you hunt down a Linux system or you buy a Mac, you're pretty much stuck with Vista. Sad, but true.
So, when I had to get a new PC in a hurry, after one of my PCs went to the big bit-ranch in the sky with a fried motherboard, the one I bought, a Dell Inspiron 530S from my local Best Buy came pre-infected with Vista Home Premium. Big deal. It took me less than an hour to install Linux Mint 5 Elyssa R1 on it.
As expected, everything on this 2.4GHz Intel Core2 Duo Processor E4600-powered PC ran perfectly with Mint. But, then it struck me, everyone is talking about having to buy Vista systems and then 'downgrading' them to XP Pro, how hard really is it to do that.? Since I had left half the 500BG SATA hard drive unpartitioned, I decided to install XP SP3 on it to see how much, if any, trouble I'd run into. The answer: a lot.
First, thanks to my Microsoft TechNet membership I could download an XP disk image, which included all the patches up to and including SP3. Many people aren't going to be that lucky. They'll need to install XP and then download perhaps hundreds of megabytes of patches. Boy, doesn't that sound like a lot of fun?
If you don't have a MSDN (Microsoft Developers Network) or TechNet membership, there are two ways to approach this problem. The first is to manually slipstream the patches into an XP installation CD. You can find a good set of instructions on how to do this in Slipstreaming Windows XP Service Pack 2 and Create Bootable CD. While the article is for SP2, the same technique works for XP SP3 as well.
The other way is use nLite. This is a program that allows you to customize Windows XP and 2000. While it's primarily so that you can set up Windows without components you don't want, such as Internet Explorer 6, Outlook Express, MSN Explorer, or Messenger, you can also use it to create fully patched-up boot/installation CDs. I highly recommend it.
This time I didn't need to use either one. I simply put in my newly burned XP SP3 CD and went through the usual XP installation routine. Within an hour, I was booting XP.
If this had been Linux my work would have been done. With XP, I soon discovered my job was just beginning. I soon found that XP couldn't recognize my graphics sub-system, a totally ordinary Integrated Intel GMA (Graphics Media Accelerator) 3100; the audio system, the Realtek HD Audio chipset, or, most annoying of all, the Intel 10/100Mbps Ethernet port. How can an operating system in 2008 not recognize an Ethernet port?
Well, XP doesn't.
Fortunately, Dell includes a CD with the full range of Windows drivers on it. With it, I was able to install the drivers for all the equipment without much trouble. Within another hour, I finally had a working XP SP3 system.
That wasn't so bad was it? Well, here's my problem, except for Dell, I don't know of any vendors who ship their PCs with driver disks anymore. The usual vendor answer for when you have a driver problem is for you to go online, search down the right driver, download, and install it. Except, of course, had that been my only course of action, I would have been up the creek without a paddle because XP wasn't capable of letting me talk to my network.
Mint, on the other hand, let me point out, had no trouble with any of my hardware. Thus Ubuntu-based Linux recognized the equipment, it set it up and let me get to work. It was Windows that proved to be a pain in the rump.
Greg Kroah-Hartman, a prominent Linux developer, is right. Linux Journal recently reported that he recently told an audience at the Ottawa Linux Symposium that "Linux supports more different types of devices than any other operating system ever has in the history of computing."
Linux isn't perfect that way, as Kroah-Hartman would be the first to admit. Based on what I experienced, though, Linux is much better than Windows at supporting modern hardware.
We have this illusion, that's just because Windows works on the systems it comes pre-installed on, that Windows has great built-in driver support. No, it doesn't. Once you move to installing Windows on a new system, you'll quickly find that Linux, not Windows, has the better built-in hardware support.
Yes, that's right. Linux, not Windows, is easier to install on a new PC. Just something to think about as you get ready to strip Vista off your new computer.
Fair enough. I will point out again that the virtual test was IN ADDITION TO the real OS on real hardware problems that were seen in the article and on numerous web forums.
It is an additional data point, showing that Windows XP refuses to recognize a well documented, well understood Ethernet implementation.
To sum up:
Real Dell hardware, Intel EtherPro chip:
Current version of Linux Mint - OK
Most current version of Windows XP (SP3) - FAIL
Other, various hardware, Intel EtherPro chip:
Current versions of Linux - OK
2002 version of Linux - OK
Most current version of Windows XP (SP3) - FAIL
Virtual hardware, emulated Intel EtherPro chip:
Current versions of Linux, FreeBSD, OpenBSD - OK
2002 version of Linux - OK
Most current version of Windows XP (SP3) - FAIL
See the pattern?
Depends on what youre doing, Ive had to do some damn awful registry crap on windows in the past and the fact I could use a mouse to do it made it no more intuitive..
Most distros now have gui’s for common task that will pop up a box asking for the root password (sorta like windows or osx)
Your “data point” and the article’s have no relationship to each other. All we’ve got from the article is that XP doesn’t have drivers for some newer hardware, something I never disputed, the only part I dispute is the author and you using newer Linuxes than XP and thinking it has any meaning.
Then we have you putting stuff on virtual machines and not getting hardware detected. Completely unrelated concepts, lends nothing to the original discussion.
It's not newer hardware. It's ancient hardware.
the only part I dispute is the author and you using newer Linuxes than XP and thinking it has any meaning.
Even though I've pointed out (several times) that older Linuxes see the same "new" hardware just fine.
Then we have you putting stuff on virtual machines and not getting hardware detected. Completely unrelated concepts, lends nothing to the original discussion.
It does show a remarkable consistency of Windows XP (SP3) to not detect an Intel EtherPro chip, regardless of whether it is real or virtual.
Look we had this argument yesterday, you’ve now looped it all back around to the beginning. Look up the answers I already gave. He’s wrong. You’re wrong. The test is BS. We’re done. Bye.
Judging by all the botnets out there, neither is MS-Windows.
Most companies seem to operate under the assumption that their software is the only software you’re going to run on this machine. So it’s OK if they totally take over the machine.
Just look at multi-media software. They all want to have all the various media formats default to going through them, even the ones they can’t actually run well (I’ve lost track of how many media packages I’ve seen that can’t open Quicktime files but still want .mov to go to them), they all want these stupid little TSR in your startup to make it “faster” when they open files, they all operate from a theory that you have no other media software on your computer so of course you want them to do everything for you.
Yeah, I would agree with all that.
But like in the case of the AIO, when they supply software to do the same thing that could be done with nothing more than simple networking already in place, the needle on my chicanery meter starts twitching.
They all love to do that though. There’s always been good money in doing something the OS already does. Remember back in the DOS days there were half a dozen apps that did nothing more than tweak your config.sys and autoexec to use himem and free up space in the lower 640. None of them did anything that you couldn’t do in Edit for yourself, none of them even did it any better than a halfway experienced geek could, but the all made these products. And some of them made money at it. There’s always a market for a slightly better UI, or even a quicker to find but otherwise identical UI.
HP has a proprietary printer job language called “HP LaserJet” usually, and you have to download the software package that includes the language.
Most (if not all) robust Linux installs come with the open sourced HP Laserjet printer language package included.
relictele, the hundreds of megabytes isn’t an exaggeration, if you are coming off a clean SP2 install as of May 19th 2008 it would take 680ish MBs to update all of the patches. That took me an hour and a half on high speed cable internet. I remember the date because it took me all day to update the dang system.
I still prefer XP for daily use, but I prefer to use the NLite competitor, called RVM_Integrator. That and weekly backups using Acronis TrueImage.
Sure--it's gotta wait until this weekend, though. I won't get home until late tomorrow night. Then I'm off to another install on Monday.
do you use Firefox? If so, "Xinha Here" is a great extension for posting to FR!
You know, I thought about what you wrote here, and decided to make some changes. I added a user account that had full administrative rights. I then changed my user account to "restricted". Guess what. I could no longer print to my printer when logged in on my account. The printer works fine though in the new administrator account I opened.
I thought I'd change my personal account to "standard" instead of "restricted". Can't do that. There is no option for a Group name named "standard". "Administrator" and "Restricted" are the only two groups to which I can add new users.
So, I'm back to square one. I system restored to where I was before making the changes. If you have any suggestions on how to get around such issues I'd really appreciate hearing them (I've been all over the place online but searches don't address this specific matter...that I can find). But you really came across with some criticism ("If it is too inconvenient for you..." or "...and don't care about the info it contains getting into the wrong hands"...). And here I try to take your opinion constructively and it gets me nowhere; well, worse than nowhere.
I'd say thanks, but I'm not sure for what. But I will say, be careful of what you recommend so blithely. You can potentially wreak havoc without intending to. Fortunately, I didn't let it get away from me.
Since you changed the rights of the owner account (the one you created when the system was new), then the rights enjoyed by said account no longer apply since the resources (like printers) were set up with your account in mind. You essentially locked yourself out.
Now, since you changed your "owner" account back, everything works fine.
Administering a system is not trivial (I started in 1985 with NetWare), and I did not mean to imply that it was, nor was I going to be able to explain it to you in the confines of the thread.
I'm sorry for your temporary troubles but you did very well in creating a user with admin rights. You created a "back door"!
The basic premise of my threads was to get you to think about, and RESEARCH, for yourself, the ins and outs of a multi-user system and the security of said system. And whether or not multiple users use your particular system (individually or at the same time), or it's just you, it is still a multi-user system and the ACl still applies.
In XP and below (don't ask me about Vista) you have, via the control panel applet "Users & Groups" to create users AND groups. You can create any damn groups you want to and add any or all users to said group(s). And you can then tell the various resources on your system (files, directories, printers etc.,) that certain users and or groups have the right to use, read, write, delete, modify, control... whatever said resource.
So take one of your newly created accounts, make it a restricted account, and then find your printer in control panel and right click on it and go into properties and look for "sharing". In there you will be able to select users and or groups that can access said resource, and to what degree. You can also do that with your home directory or sub-directories therein. Windows, Documents and settings (if memory serves) In linux it's /home; NetWare \USERS
So find your current account directory and right click on a directory or "Folder" and goto properties and find "sharing" Give the restricted account rights said directory (or file or whatever), then log in as that account and access the resource you gave it permission to access.
Se what happens. Play around with it. I would also suggest looking into either online or at Borders, a book or tutorial on basic Windows system administration for a multi-user system.
The lessons/concepts you learn there will carry over to just about any and all systems you are likely to encounter. The specifics of how its done may differ from system to system, but the concepts are pretty much universal.
And they're "Best Practices"!
So great job on thinking about it, trying it, and then reporting back on how it didn't work. You're now way further along than the vast majority of Windows users.
Once you've researched and played around with it more, you will come to understand why us old SysAdmins get our knickers in a twist over this issue with the uninitiated.
Welcome to reality. Security is a pain in the butt. Yes if you run under a user with non-administrative privileges you have to spend some time tweaking the permissions so you can do stuff like access printers (that’s what you need to do with your restricted account, give it permission on the printer, probably in the printer properties or printer share). And you have to do things like login as a different account to run installs. Of course on the other side of it you don’t have permission to accidentally install viruses, and you probably don’t have permissions for trap websites to plant spyware.
Security in computers is just like security in the real world. Annoying but necessary. If you lock a door you can’t get back through without a key. If you lock the registry you can’t get in without the right account. If you’re going to run wide open (logged in as admin) you need to be careful, and lucky.
bcsco, I had the same difficulties with Ubuntu. I stumbled upon PCLinuxOS 2007. It’s great. I’ve never had to enter any coding to get anything to run.
2007 is getting a bit long in the tooth, as there’s a newer kernel out and lots of new updates, but there’s MiniMe 2008, which is a stripped down version. Load only what you want from the repositories. There’s TinyMe, Sam Linux, etc. all based on PCLinuxOS. There’s supposed to be a newer version of 2007 coming out sometime this year.
Your problems with Ubuntu mirrored my own. I deleted it and went back to Windows for a good while. PCLinuxOS is good enough to get me to wipe Windows. Everything works. If I didn’t use Microsoft Flight sim, I’d not need any windows at all.
Look into Flight Gear.
Binaries/Source available for:
Windows
Linux
Mac OS X
Solaris (sparc/x86)
sgi
FreeBSD
Perhaps not as polished as FS (yet) but getting there.
What I didn't add in my post was that I deleted the printer and reinstalled it in the new administrator account, AND made it a share. Oops! It still wouldn't work in my original account. I'd print something (as restricted user) to it while the print queue window was open. The file to print would appear and begin spooling, then it would suddenly disappear. That's when I finally gave up and went back to square one.
In XP and below (don't ask me about Vista) you have, via the control panel applet "Users & Groups" to create users AND groups. You can create any damn groups you want to and add any or all users to said group(s).
Nope. When I go to Control Panel the only related option is User Accounts. I even went and ran Control Userpasswords2. When I'd click on a user then try to change group membership from "Restricted" to "Standard" I'd get an error message saying no such group name exists. I can find nowhere where I'm allowed to add/edit/delete groups. Nowhere. I even tried Tweak UI under "Logon". Nothing there to help. I then went to add/remove Windows Components. I searched to see if my installation was short something. Nope. Nothing that jumped out as contributing to this. So no, I can't do all this stuff.
So find your current account directory and right click on a directory or "Folder" and goto properties and find "sharing" Give the restricted account rights said directory (or file or whatever), then log in as that account and access the resource you gave it permission to access.
Nope. As stated above it doesn't work. As for giving rights to users, there's nothing available on the tabs to do that. Oh, I've seen that alright in Windows 2000. I've done it often there. But not here. Sorry.
I have two PC's networked with shared directories and printers. No problem over the network at all. I can print & share files between my Windows XP laptop to my Windows 2000 tower and vice versa. Each has a shared printer attached and each works flawlessly over the network. But the printer attached to this laptop with Windows XP will NOT work in a restricted account. No way no how.
Thanks for the advice, but I've been ahead of what you've told me. I may not have your credentials but I'm not a flake nor a newbie by any means.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.