New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
@Kairus I think the only people that hate on Windows are the ones who haven't tried it since Windows ME =D
Both have actually been dead simple for me, all that was needed was installing proprietary drivers. ATI/AMD, nVidia, and Intel proprietary Linux drivers all have a graphical control panel that allows you to change settings for both multiple monitor support and 3D acceleration.
Linux is not a desktop environment. What desktop environments have you tried?
I've worked with pretty much every single (consumer and NT) Windows version from Windows 3.1 to Windows 7.
I am just tired with the virus's.
Show me where I put anyone down? If you actually read my post I complimented you...also if you find me saying win for desktop linux for server as being offensive maybe you need to read some other users posts :P because they're saying the same thing, because win rocks at desktops and linux rocks at servers.
That's the main reason I've given all my relatives Ubuntu instead, and explain why password prompts come up. If they didn't try to run something, then it shouldn't come up, and should be closed otherwise =b
Hehe, I can only imagine desktop linux back then :P. I really wish that desktop linux was better and more widely supported, but it's sadly not, and I'm just not as much of a *nix fanboy
. I like Windows 7, it runs great, and it gives me zero problems. Any kernel panics or crashes I get are due to non-Microsoft drivers, typically nvidia drivers, and I won't blame Microsoft for them 
. Even now though, the drivers can recover 99% of the time instead of causing a kernel panic, so things have really improved.
Inevitable really, linux would be filled with viruses as well if it had a similar marketshare and usage patterns. I haven't had a problem with viruses in years though, and that was when I was very young and stupid. Free antivirus software is pretty good now as well, I used to use Kaspersky for a few years, but now I just stick to free antivirus + free firewall software, and I have zero problems.
Run under a guest account, that severely limits what a virus can do, not that much different than linux.
Which then proceeds to break just about every application since applications in Windows expect to have some kind of access. The problem with Windows is not just in the technical implementation of the security model, but also in what developers have come to expect of it. While the average Linux application will dump its stuff in your homedir (which it will always have access to), there's quite a lot of Windows applications that will attempt to write to directories like Program Files and friends or even the Windows directory, simply because that used to be possible or because "most users running this will be an administrator anyway". Running under a limited account would break those applications.
Not really, no. The reason there are very few viruses for Linux is the same reason there are very few viruses for OS X despite the latter becoming quite a lot more frequently used (one major virus outbreak? Really?); the security model is much more solid. Saying "it's just about the market share" pretty much comes down to ignoring every other possible variable.
^ Insult and dumb, since I already explained that my usage pattern was the same.
I stated I don't use Windows 7.
You've insulted other people... oh let me pick one that's recent...
Not to mention your bitching about why people wouldn't visit your site because this one sucked so much, and constant bashing of BuyVM. But you're still here.
That "virus" even required your password to "infect" the system. Without it, it only infected your user files.
+1
Anti-Virus company's will say its down to market share because they want you to buy their product, there's even evidence that that "Mac-Virus" came from an Anti-Virus company since they were able to track its usage somehow. These AV company's their products as root, which we know is dangerous, sine if you hack the AV you hack the system.
I actually wasn't even aware of that, I was under the impression it used a vulnerability to do that. You're talking about Flashback, right?
It think it used a Java vulnerability to get file system access, it only infected ~ though since it got hit by the UNIX sandbox.
+2
A big fault in the market share argument is that linux is used on servers. MacOSX never worried about security (note how long it takes for a security patch (usually a few weeks to a couple of months)), while on Linux it's still a very possible threat. While more people will definitely try, and inevitably find vulnerabilities, the kernel is constantly being looked at by many people. And if a virus is created, the people working on fixing the vulnerability will be able to push it out quickly thanks to the way the Linux packaging system works. Submit patch, test, and deploy ^^
That's actually not true, when Vista came out yes many windows apps broke(to an extent) if they tried to do certain system things without using new ACL's, tokens, and other security measures Microsoft now required them to interact with first. Almost all semi modern apps(made within the last 6-8 years) adjusted and today you should have no issue with programs not working right because of lack of security access issues under a limited account(unless they absolutely need admin access like firewalls etc..).Also keep in mind Vista/Win7 has a legacy run mode too, which helps run some older stuff. The program Files mention is a good point, but as I said programmers needed to adjust and write to a users application data dir or similar instead so all programs that are semi modern should be fine.
If a program does break under a limited account then the dev is doing it wrong, or the app is really old and you should try and get a new version, try running under legacy mode, or if you're forced run it under admin.
But Windows has so many security exploits, does it still run the UI under Administrator?
@Daniel UAC sort of fixed that issue, although I remember UAC being broken a couple months after release (by two exploits iirc), being able to bypass it completely. Not to mention that the default login is admin, and doesn't require a password lol...
I don't believe it's completely market share related, as I said a few posts up, it's the users' usage patterns, and if you compare what a linux computer and a Windows/OS X computer is used for, for the most parts, they're complete opposite functions. I highly doubt many linux users are going around running random applications, or doing activities that open up the possibility of being infected. I haven't had a virus in years, and that's because I don't do stupid things on my computer. Windows users are certainly less tech savvy than *nix users. I don't deny linux is more secure, but I think too many people make it out to seem like Windows is just full of holes and a huge security risk.
Just lol....lol.
I remember there was an exploit in Office for Windows (under Administrator), where you could open a .doc file and it would run code as Administrator (even under another account).
Thing is, Windows treats Administrators as true Administrators, on *nix there is only one Administrator (root), everyone else is limited accounts where a few can "temporarily elevate" their permissions, but it requires their approval.
@Kairus You're right, Windows doesn't have as many holes as one would think, they've actually done a fantastic job at securing a once terrible system. The random applications are the real issue, and although a software centre doesn't guarantee a system free of issues, it's definitely a step in the right direction.
WTB live post updates so I don't have to refresh =b
You should, linux and mac have only like 1-3% of the desktop market I believe. And the threat these days isn't so much viruses but malware, made to steal your stuff for profit. So these attackers focus on what's the most profitable, and that's windows. Linux is more secure than windows out the gate, for the most part because it's limited by what you can do(tiny posix API vs MASSIVE indepth, amazing windows api) and because linux focuses a lot on privileges. In fact when I tried to connect to irc networks with the ident "root" for fun, I've been auto banned with a message whining about making a non-root account. Linux nor mac is by means immune from viruses though, mac just had that big virus in the news spread all over the place, also in terms of linux I've read that a linux version of unrealircd sitting on their official servers was apparently backdoored over a year, and no one seemed to even notice
It's an ongoing fight though, they have to constantly update patchguard and other things, which helps guard against rootkits, which are the nastiest of nasty. I don't like the fact Windows updates even when you have auto update turned off though...yes you heard me right, they've been caught doing it a few years ago, IDK if they do it all the time but still annoying. In fact the "stealth" update Microsoft issued broke things that's how people discovered it.
I think its much higher then that (13%?)
Lets remember, you can't even load kernel extensions on Windows 64bit without having to pay M$. Look at Mac apps, then look at Windows apps, I think your notice which ones are superior.
A calculator utility should not need root.
It is currently, although virus's can still infect the user folder, they can't infect anyone else's files or 90% of the system.
If someone made a Linux virus that was effective, they could in-theory shut down a large portion of the internet, which one appeals to malware-writers more? Infect a few computers or shut down the internet? yet it does not happen.
I believe they're actually going with some kind of app store in Windows 8, I don't believe it will change user's habits though, and it doesn't matter how secure a system is when the users are dumb, but it certainly is a step in the right direction, especially if we see all the auto updaters from adobe and sun/oracle go away :P.
Wow! Mac has really gained market share, they had only about 3% for years and years, Microsoft better hope win8 and its crappy metro is a winner.
@taipres holy shit, never realised they implemented "PatchGuard" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_Patch_Protection)... that's pretty effing sweet, and although there seems to be quite a bit of controversy over it, it seems Microsoft is updating it accordingly, so all around win for them!
Adobe have just made the latest OS X Flash player update run a background updater, and that means they are running a program as root! Stupid Adobe.
Just for fun, try OpenedFilesView on a 64-bits installation of Windows Vista or Windows 7. Or basically any other tool doing the same.
I've actually installed Linux for a considerable amount of people that kept filling up my e-mail and voicemail with requests for me to 'make their computer fast again' (read: removing all the shit they installed). Since I installed Linux they haven't had any such issues.
Experienced users? No. Users that barely know how to turn on a computer? Hell yes.
I assume you manually check what is running on your machine then, inspecting traffic, constantly checking for strange processes or connections, etc.?
If you are talking about the average tech-savviness of a Windows user vs. that of a Linux user, sure. However, considering there are a LOT more non-tech-savvy Linux users nowadays (mostly thanks to Ubuntu), that argument doesn't really fly as an explanation for malware anymore.
It is, and it is. It's becoming increasingly more secure, but plenty of issues exist, and the fact that it was even possible to circumvent UAC does not inspire much trust in the way things are handled now either. Windows has a very very long way to go.
People tend to revert to these kind of responses if they don't have any sensible arguments to claim otherwise.
I think it's crazy that iOS has such a high market share. I'm surprised that it surpasses android's market share, but I think android will eventually take over. http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2012/4/comScore_Reports_February_2012_U.S._Mobile_Subscriber_Market_Share