Windows - Linux usability

[AssKoala]

Originally Posted by teknomage1

I don't see where your dog in this fight is Koala, I mean you called me nuts for disagreeing with the predominant meme that linux is hard to use citing the wisdon of the crowd ("the world agrees with him not you") and yet you now turn away from the crowd and say despite every major internet affecting worm and personal info stealing virus going affecting Windows, Linux, because it is constantly improved, is inherently insecure.

Actually, the security crowd generally disagrees with the notion that Linux is secure. That's why projects like Gentoo Hardened and SELinux exist -- to improve Linux security. It all depends who you ask and what is considered "secure". Tell one of the OpenBSD developers that Linux is secure and they'll laugh in your face.

Of course, Linux has tons of rootkits, by that metric Windows is significantly more secure than Linux, so I fail to see your point. Just because Windows has worms attacking it and Linux doesn't, doesn't mean Linux is secure. I never said Linux was less secure than Windows, I said it's not secure. If it's hackable, it is not secure. Linux boxes require some locking down to really be secure.

Let's go back to the wise DJMaze's words:

if we grew up with Linux the world would be different but not better or worse.
just different...

If the world were primarily Linux on the desktops, you might be claiming how amazing Windows is because it doesn't suffer from rootkits and other *nix security issues.

Just because the United States didn't have any terrorists attacking it, didn't mean it was secure. We found that out the hard way.

Now I'm not a betting man, but I'd say you're out of ammo and are still trying to redefine the issue to make me wrong instead of actually sitting down and thinking about something.

Uhm. k. You're presenting such strong arguments.

On a side note, it might be a good move for a mod to cut this thread into two threads.

[teknomage1]

Well I've shot down all of your arguments to the point you had to redefine the word artist to mean tech savvy users.

[AssKoala]

Originally Posted by teknomage1

Well I've shot down all of your arguments to the point you had to redefine the word artist to mean tech savvy users.

Yes, because a pencil/paper artist is the same as 3D Graphics Artists.

Seeing as both Maya and Houdini (and others) generally require some amount of script coding, I wouldn't consider one of those artists a "technically incompetent" person. You said yourself those artists are delving into shell commands and techniques -- that is not what anyone would think of when someone is using artists to defend the useability of a Linux distribution.

I don't think anyone would disagree with me on that point.

[teknomage1]

You chose to assume they're all 3d artists / technical people.

[AssKoala]

Originally Posted by teknomage1

You chose to assume they're all 3d artists / technical people.

Originally Posted by teknomage1

You seem to ignore the fact that these people can and do use the shell and grep and a whole host of unix features.

Once you hit that point, the discussion moves from "general dumb user ease of use" to "more tech saavy" user. You didn't use the qualifier "most", "many", or some other word to denote a part of.

Like both DJMaze and I said, the problem doesn't come in simply clicking icons (which I agreed with you, Linux is no harder to use than Windows or OS X) but in installing applications (DJMaze added drivers, which I agreed with) and mantaining the system (though obviously me and DJMaze disagree on some points).

If ease of use, to you, ends with opening up applications that IT dept. installs, clicking icons, and using tools -- then the dispute is not about the ease of use of Linux but the ease of use of those specific applications.

[teknomage1]

My point is its very easy to get normal people to that point. I'm an animator by the way.

[AssKoala]

Originally Posted by teknomage1

My point is its very easy to get normal people to that point. I'm an animator by the way.

I disagree, though I may be pessimistic in the intelligence of the majority.

Once you have to start delving into typing commands and leaving the comfort of a good GUI, things go downhill. It's my opinion that you should not have to touch a commandline. It seems to be the same opinion of the KDE and GNOME guys as well (though Torvalds doesn't seem to like what GNOME does).

I mean, what happens when the user is running their own system and they type su and their root password and get root. Go running around and type something along the lines of rm -rf / or rm -rf * in the wrong directory? What happens when they start mucking with /etc? The average user should not be allowed anywhere near the commandline, especially when the OS doesn't support file locking the way Windows does.

[teknomage1]

I think a user can do the same thing on windows. I believe also that we seem to have different views of the essential user experince so as you have said further debate is essentially fruitless.

[DJMaze]

Ehm Windows also has a commandline and you can do the same as in the GUI but the difference here is that it is not documented.

I do agree that the default behavior of file locking and systemfile restore in Windows is a good approach for the average user but a pain in the ass for us.
However when a virus modifies the system32\dllcache you need your Windows CD.
This means that you can't modify files or delete unused libs

[AssKoala]

Originally Posted by DJMaze

Ehm Windows also has a commandline and you can do the same as in the GUI but the difference here is that it is not documented.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that as of Windows XP and 100% sure that as of Server 2003, all GUI commands can be run in the commandline. That is, there's nothing you can't script.

Documentation is definitely hard to find . There are a lot of websites dedicated to listing the commands, at least but there's no man pages.

[teknomage1]

There's actually a pretty silly article debating the merits of format c: vs. rm -rf /.
http://hohle.net/scrap_post.php?post=23&m=full

[AssKoala]

Originally Posted by teknomage1

There's actually a pretty silly article debating the merits of format c: vs. rm -rf /.
http://hohle.net/scrap_post.php?post=23&m=full

Haha, that's pretty funny, actually. Technically, if he wanted to make things identical, he would have had to login as a limited user and use the runas command to execute the del command in Windows, still good, though

[DJMaze]

Originally Posted by AssKoala

Technically, if he wanted to make things identical, he would have had to login as a limited user...

Ehm since when does the average user creates a limited account or a password?
His test was "out of the box"

[Valmont]

Nice discussion going on here, I've read every word!
Perhaps one or two words went astray but that's ok. The three of you created something bloody interesting here.

I have my thoughts obviusly. I don't feel Linux is more secure than other OS's. For me a combination of administration & tech implementations is the key. But this counts for MS products as well.

The thing that really bothers me in Linux is that Linux is an OS made of components "patched-together" with scripts coming from everywhere.

There is way too much code bloating as well. In MS products as well, but at least they hide it .

But for me more importantly, I'm sitting like 12 hours a day staring at a screen. The font renderingsystem from Linux bothers me. I never ever had sharp, crisp, crystal clear images of letters.

[teknomage1]

Have you adjusted the convergence on you monitor, Valmont? I know it's kind of a chore to get exactly right but it can really make a huge difference. Our monitors have to be rather precise for the stuff we do and in general the convergence is tuned once every three months, along with the color and contrast. You have to be careful because when you adjust the contrast the convergence needs re-adjusting.