30 day Linux challenge.

reply to post by sixswornsermon


That's the problem, this should not be a question of "my OS is better than yours", it should be a question of "this OS is better for what I want to do" or "I like this OS better".

From what I have seen, many people have no problem in spending time learning about Linux but are against the idea of spending time learning about Windows.

As you said, they are just tools, we just need to know how to use them.

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by sixswornsermon

 

That's the problem, this should not be a question of "my OS is better than yours", it should be a question of "this OS is better for what I want to do" or "I like this OS better".

From what I have seen, many people have no problem in spending time learning about Linux but are against the idea of spending time learning about Windows.

As you said, they are just tools, we just need to know how to use them.

Well said i agree 100% i have both windows and linux on two of my pc's and while i rarely use windows any more because linux suits my needs better it is certainly a question of using the right tool for the right job with a little personal preference thrown in for good measure

reply to post by ArMaP


I hear ya. I use both on a daily basis for different reasons.

I like Microsoft products just fine. It's just that sometimes they tick me off while trying to do a simple task, and I know it's only because of completely ineffective licensing conventions.

That's my only real gripe.

reply to post by sixswornsermon


I guess someone has to pay for the special licensing agreements, like one I know here in Portugal, that allows the users of any Microsoft software at work (in a state organisation) to use the same software at home without the need to buy any licenses.

reply to post by ArMaP


Yes. Volume License Keys.

I wish they worked for Grandma!!!!!

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by sixswornsermon

 

That's the problem, this should not be a question of "my OS is better than yours", it should be a question of "this OS is better for what I want to do" or "I like this OS better".

From what I have seen, many people have no problem in spending time learning about Linux but are against the idea of spending time learning about Windows.

As you said, they are just tools, we just need to know how to use them.

True, also with Windows the machine you buy it on allows you to make disc to restore your system to factory default if something goes wrong. I know HP does this, though it only allows you to make one set of discs. You'd have to use ImgBurn or the likes to rip it as an .iso so you can make more copies.

Also with Windows Upgrade discs you can do a double install, it's legal and Microsoft built it in. Just select 'custom install' then you can go to advance and format your hard drive (in case you can't get a virus off of it for instance) then when it ask for the registration key SKIP IT for now then allow it to finish installing. Then just run the update manager and any drivers you need. Now after that put the disc back in and run Upgrade and it will install again and when the registration key comes up enter it or after it's done installing. There you go. Otherwise if you just do a custom clean install it won't allow you to register it because it's a 'full copy' when you register it after the Upgrade it accepts it. It's the way they have it coded when installed. Weird but Microsoft allows that work around.

i'm not going to bother with the ubuntu 30 day challenge - no need,

i'm a full blown linux user already, no windows on my system,
sacked it years ago,

and another reason is, ubuntu will not run properly on my hardware - unless i wrestle it into submission,
so i use a decent version of linux (mandriva) and have done for the past 6 years,

oh, i can do everything a windows user can, faster and on less powerfull hardware,

games - thats what my xbox is for,

and a note on the virus issue,
a linux system is naturally safer, not because of the amount of users but because of the way its designed, the way software is checked in the various repositories and lack of root access, etc

if there was a linux virus then why havn't web servers been infected ?
i'm sure the windows world would be the first to shout "i told you so"

i'm in no way saying there are no linux virus's, there are - there's just non in the wild

so a new 30 day challenge would be - hunt a linux virus down,
go on, there has to be at least one

Originally posted by solvectra
i'm not going to bother with the ubuntu 30 day challenge - no need,

i'm a full blown linux user already, no windows on my system,
sacked it years ago,

and another reason is, ubuntu will not run properly on my hardware - unless i wrestle it into submission,
so i use a decent version of linux (mandriva) and have done for the past 6 years,

oh, i can do everything a windows user can, faster and on less powerfull hardware,

games - thats what my xbox is for,

and a note on the virus issue,
a linux system is naturally safer, not because of the amount of users but because of the way its designed, the way software is checked in the various repositories and lack of root access, etc

if there was a linux virus then why havn't web servers been infected ?
i'm sure the windows world would be the first to shout "i told you so"

i'm in no way saying there are no linux virus's, there are - there's just non in the wild

so a new 30 day challenge would be - hunt a linux virus down,
go on, there has to be at least one

edit on 18/1/2011 by solvectra because: (no reason given)

Trojans

* Kaiten - Linux.Backdoor.Kaiten trojan horse
* Rexob - Linux.Backdoor.Rexob trojan
* Waterfall screensaver backdoor - on gnome-look.org

Viruses

* 42
* Arches
* Alaeda - Virus.Linux.Alaeda
* Bad Bunny - Perl.Badbunny
* Binom - Linux/Binom
* Bliss - requires root privileges
* Brundle
* Bukowski
* Caveat
* Coin
* Diesel - Virus.Linux.Diesel.962
* Hasher
* Kagob a - Virus.Linux.Kagob.a
* Kagob b - Virus.Linux.Kagob.b
* Lacrimae (aka Crimea)
* MetaPHOR (also known as Simile)
* Nuxbee - Virus.Linux.Nuxbee.1403
* OSF.8759
* PiLoT
* Podloso - Linux.Podloso (The iPod virus)
* RELx
* Rike - Virus.Linux.Rike.1627
* RST - Virus.Linux.RST.a (known for infecting Korean release of Mozilla Suite 1.7.6 and Thunderbird 1.0.2 in September 2005
* Satyr - Virus.Linux.Satyr.a
* Staog - made obsolete by updates
* Vit - Virus.Linux.Vit.4096
* Winter - Virus.Linux.Winter.341
* Winux (also known as Lindose and PEElf)
* Wit virus
* ZipWorm - Virus.Linux.ZipWorm

Worms

* Adm - Net-Worm.Linux.Adm
* Adore
* Cheese - Net-Worm.Linux.Cheese
* Devnull
* Kork[59]
* Linux/Lion
* Linux/Lupper.worm
* Mighty - Net-Worm.Linux.Mighty
* Millen - Linux.Millen.Worm
* Ramen worm - targeted versions 6.2 and 7.0 of the Red Hat Linux distributions only
* Slapper
* SSH Bruteforce

Source

Also Mandriva seems to be having financial trouble Link Granted those versions did come out and a 2011 version is in development, there is still the possibility that Mandriva could still run into future problems.

reply to post by ArchIlluminatus


Your source also says:

however, few if any are in the wild, and most have been made obsolete by updates.

from the wiki link

few if any are in the wild, and most have been made obsolete by updates

2007 was the 'latest',

help.ubuntu.com...

apart from one D-o-S attack in 2009,

so i really should have said - a linux virus from the past year, or the latest virus,

all bugs in programming are quickly patched as are all 'back doors',

oh and i am well aware of the mandriva story, i'm waiting for mageia, its a community distribution and a fork of mandriva (as pclinuxos is a fork of mandriva)

mageia.org...

or i may just stick with mandriva as 2010.2 has been released - i'm still on 2010.0, stable, secure and my / is ext3 so partimage can image it (it can't image ext4)

reply to post by solvectra


Hehe I used Mandriva (Mandrake) for awhile when I was getting back into Linux about 4-5 years ago.

I liked it except for KDE being largely broken at the time. I'm sure it has improved.

I just throw this out there for those who are having trouble with Linux distros recognizing their hardware, but still want to try Linux out, perhaps one of the many PCLinux options would be worth a look... They do claim to be the best at recognizing hardware right from the start and my experience this weekend confirmed it recognized hardware on laptop and a netbook that Ubuntu has a difficult time with...

reply to post by ArMaP


So true. The first Linux I tried was Ubuntu, as with most users. Then I went "distro hopping," a thing most hobbyists do, until I found a distro that I liked, was pretty with eye candy, had all the right drivers by default, and a security system I could live with. I found all of that in PC Linux. Fast and stable, passed all stealth tests with flying colors, easy to operate, quick booting. I can download flash videos and watch them with VLC player, or convert them to MP3 format. Thunderbird handles my email with ease.
My machine: Azus Sempron Dual Nvidia chipset, 250 Gb Seagate Sata hard drive, 2 Gb RAM.

I really want to try ubuntu, but god it's a pain! always says, "this or that failed", "invalid argument", "permission denied", etc... i can't even get it to demo from disk. and when you goto the forums they say you have to burn it multiple times and/or have a certain kinda disk drive, whatever....

anyone suggest a similar distro that has less install probs???

reply to post by wingsfan


It would be easier if you told us which distro(s) you tried, that way we will not suggest those.

10.10 32bit and 10.10 64 bit

irony is, windows boots up a bit faster now, coincedence I guess.

Try it for 15 days instead
then make the switch to debian and cut out the middle-men

reply to post by wingsfan


Try LinuxMint or PCLinuxOS. Gnome desktop is probably the easiest for Linux beginners. KDE confused the heck out of me.

Just a reminder:

Note: Make sure to burn the ISO image to disk, and not to write the ISO file to the disk. A very common mistake, especially for people using Nero, is to actually burn the ISO file on the disk as a data file. The ISO file is an image of a disk so it needs to be burnt not as a file which will appear on the disk, but as an ISO image which will be decompressed and whose content will be burnt onto the disc. After burning the CD you shouldn't see the ISO file within the disc, but rather folders like “casper” or “isolinux”. Most burning software has a special option for this.

Which means that to do this, you may have to use a program other than what you are using for writing music to cd. This is suggested in the Mint pdf:

If you’re running Windows you can use a program like InfraRecorder:
infrarecorder.org...

If you have Windows 7 you can just right click on the ISO and select burn disc image. Windows actually made it simple to do lol.

reply to post by Subhuti




Wasn't aware of that, this makes it a lot easier then.