Linux Penguins Invade Germany

DW-World ^ | June 04 2002

[knighthawk]

Germany wasn't to happy with Windows. Not only because of the security and 'NSA-features', but also because the defragmenter was mde by a Scientology owned business. Scientology is forbidden in Germany and this defragmenter was removed from the German version of Windows 2000.

ZDNet

[knighthawk]

Ping

[Mr. K]

Great! Once they see how much this 'free' software costs them (to install and maintain) we will have one less economic competitor in the world.

I have worked on Linux and Microsoft (NT,2000) systems 50% each over the last 5 years or so, so I KNOW what I am talking about.

I expect the penguins to flame away, so... getting out my asbestos undies.

[Raymond Hendrix]

What exactly is the disadvantage to using an open source instead of Windows.

[claygone]

They are not the only countires that are thinking of using linux. Many south American countries and evern our own are thinking of using Linux to save money. I wonder what will happen in the future. I am thinking that linux will be the first product to give Mircosoft a run for it's money. me...i hope they win. That is what happens when you try and get blood from a stone

[knighthawk]

I know what you mean. I use SuSE and Redhat. But somehow I always end up using Windows 2000.

Not that Linux is bad, but not very practical. Although compiling kernals is a hobby of mine!

[knighthawk]

The Linux world is waiting for Lindows now. I really am curious to see if it really will work as advertized.

[Dimensio]

I know what it's like too. I had to set up and maintain a Linux box for routing a cable Internet connecion to multiple PCs (this was before the availability of router boxes) and it took me several hours to get it all up and running. Of course, once it was up I've only had to take it down for infrequent kernel updates.

On my main machine I dual-boot between Linux and Windows 2000. I thought I would use Linux for everything but I've found that whenever I want to play a computer game, I have to reboot to Windows. I'm sure that Germany will discover the same problem when their government employees want to play The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind.

[Salgak]

For a DESKTOP environment, Linux, despite gains made by Mandrake and SUSE, is NOT ready for prime time and the average user.

For back-office SERVER environments, I find it far more reliable than NT 4.0, and more reliable than Win2K.

The caveat: you need a GOOD Systems Administrator to run and maintain a Linux system. Microsoft works better with less-experienced admins and fresh-out-of-school MCSEs.

Of course, good, experienced Sysadmins aren't as cheap to employ as the dime-a-dozen MCSEs, but you tend to need fewer of them.

To each his own: I use Windows 2000 for some things, and Linux for others. . .

[RayChuang88]

Alas, if people think Linux is ready for the desktop now, they're going to have a major shock coming.

I've run Red Hat Linux 7.3 and frankly, it still doesn't seamlessly add new hardware support like Windows 98/ME/2000/XP does, due to the lack of Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) Plug and Play support.

This is why one of the goals of the next version of the Linux (2.6.x variants) will include ACPI support so installation becomes quite a bit easier, to say the least.

As a server operating system, Linux is wonderful; but as a desktop operating, sorry, not ready for prime time.

[r9etb]

What exactly is the disadvantage to using an open source instead of Windows.

Hm. I think if I were a bad guy looking for ways to exploit an operating system, it'd be a lot easier if I had access to the source code -- complete with the upgrades supplied by the German gov't. Then I could experiment with all sorts of hard-to-detect ways of getting into a system.

[Dimensio]

The caveat: you need a GOOD Systems Administrator to run and maintain a Linux system. Microsoft works better with less-experienced admins and fresh-out-of-school MCSEs.

Uh-huh. Heh. *snicker* *chuckle* *guffaw*

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

A Microsoft-based system can be kept up-and-running by a less experienced admin or someone fresh-out-of-school with an MCSE, but that doesn't mean that it will be run well.

I am the significant other of a Windows admin who is very experienced and well-versed in Windows security (including the things not covered in MCSE courses). He's had many a day where he's come home in a very bad mood because he's had to deal with admins from other departments (some of them brandishing shiny new MCSE certificates) who cannot properly set up their NT/2000 networks. He's dealt with users given full administrative privs (which they don't need), "admins" from the IT department (he's tech support for a non-IT department) giving out very bad advice wrt NT/2000 security setups, sending him complaints that his department members are sending out virus emails (it's klez, take a guess as two who is really running the infected machines) and administrators who pick absolutely bone-headed times to do major system maintenance and shut down entire networks.

Yes, Windows 2000 has the advantage of being simpler to use for people who may not be that experienced or knowledgeable in the field. I don't see that as a good thing.

[Dimensio]

As opposed to using known exploits in closed-source systems that the incompetent admins never got around to patching.

[Dimensio]

Oddly, I get better performance when I disable ACPI in Windows 2000. For some reason having everything assigned to IRQ 9 with a vectoring algorithm was causing data corruption when copying files from my DVD-ROM drive.

[Blagden Alley]

Is isn't so much that Linux might take over the desktop tomorrow. It won't. But getting some of the back office takes the growth out of Microsoft. And their stock price is based on expected growth.

Now they'll have to emphasize profit more. Really going after copies and seriously forcing upgrades. Neither is as friendly as MSFT is now, which is not much.

BTW: For the next few years, if they are paying big bucks for Linux types, there may not be as much spare computer expertise in the MSFT area as before. Life may get exciting.

[Mr. Bird]

For some reason having everything assigned to IRQ 9 with a vectoring algorithm was causing data corruption when copying files from my DVD-ROM drive

Yeah. I love these threads. Feels like I'm peering in on some alien race.

[ThinkDifferent]

I think if I were a bad guy looking for ways to exploit an operating system, it'd be a lot easier if I had access to the source code

You could look, but you'd have a much harder time actually finding any, since many security experts would also have looked at the code and corrected any problems that they found. Case study: IIS vs. Apache.

[rdb3]

As opposed to using known exploits in closed-source systems that the incompetent admins never got around to patching.

Not to mention a vast number of buffer overruns and exception handling.

[buaya]

"They are not the only countires that are thinking of using linux."

Taiwan opens door to open source.

[r9etb]

You could look, but you'd have a much harder time actually finding any, since many security experts would also have looked at the code and corrected any problems that they found.

You're looking at it from the perspective of finding holes and closing them. I'm looking at it from the perspective of somebody subverting the system -- for example, creating a virus "patch" in such a manner that the system operates normally, except that it's acting as a door.

I'm reminded of the story of a guy a few years ago who, while programming a banking system, noticed that the interest computations rounded the results to the nearest cent. He realized that he could divert the "rounded cents" to an account of his own, without anybody noticing -- which he did for quite some. He was finally caught because of his sudden and unexplained wealth.