Been using and learning Winddows on and over for at least 20 years....

[auntjemima]

Understand that I don't really have any skin in the game here, I use both windows and linux daily, both quite heavily.

If the implication is that linux isn't as important ( as populous a target, presumably ) as windows, you really have no clue as to it's market penetration. Sure, as a "desktop" OS, it's trailing windows, but that's about the only market segment where that's the case. Servers? Depending on which segment, but predominantly linux. Mobile? Linux again, by a landslide. MS barely has anything there ( which is too bad, because I did like their tiles on a phone ).

So you have the juicy server market, with all that lovely data which makes it a prime security target. Then you have the mobile market, which has devices which are more heavily used than desktops anymore ( another prime security target ).

It was specifically targeted towards the desktop OS. I am fully aware that Linux is the main server OS out there.

Look at it this way, basically no malware or viruses on desktop Linux, but every week we are hearing about some massive technology breach. Windows is used heavily in the desktop arena and targeted as such. Linux is used heavily in the server market and still being targeted AND compromised.

So, what is my point? Anything that gets marketshare will be attacked more than the baby brother. People want the most devastation when they create this malware, so if Linux becomes "that guy", they will face the same shit as Windows does.

 

[B00nie]

Windows users are an easy target because everyone who is unable to use anything else, uses Windows.

 

[ChadD]

It was specifically targeted towards the desktop OS. I am fully aware that Linux is the main server OS out there.

Look at it this way, basically no malware or viruses on desktop Linux, but every week we are hearing about some massive technology breach. Windows is used heavily in the desktop arena and targeted as such. Linux is used heavily in the server market and still being targeted AND compromised.

So, what is my point? Anything that gets marketshare will be attacked more than the baby brother. People want the most devastation when they create this malware, so if Linux becomes "that guy", they will face the same shit as Windows does.

The difference is.... almost every single Linux breach is achieved via social engineering. With a few wow that was stupid breaches happening when companies don't patch identified and FIXED software. Which sure is the same no matter the os... if your not going to patch months old software on extremely high value targets like the servers at equafax, you can't blame any OS.

It doesn't matter how good the tech is if the person behind it is a moron, using admin password as a log in. Yes we all agree on that.

Still without a doubt by desgin Linux is more secure. Unix is more secure... and although has a few issues of its own OSX is still more secure.

Windows is far better then it was 10 years ago and its better then it was 5 years ago, yes MS has absolutely tried to improve I give them some credit for that. They have tried hard to get people to stop using admin level accounts, hasn't really worked but they did try. Its been awhile but they moved to a signed driver system... although many users are still willing to install fake drivers for software for things like virtual drives and cracks for pirated software which can be pretty darn iffy security wise. (I don't fix windows machines everyday like some around here but I have seen my share of pirated software even on business used windows machines)

ASLR (address space layout randomization) was added by MS to vista 10 years ago, there implementation is very basic and requires software to be flagged for it (which little is), as far as I know MS hasn't improved on there version since. Linux on the other hand has had PIE (position independent executable) code since 2003... and added ASLR with kernel 2.6 in 2005, KALSR (kernel alsr) was further enhanced a few years ago.

Open source itself is also a great source of security. One thousands of eyes are on every major bit of code routing out issues before they are discovered by some kid eating pizza pockets in an FSB safe house. More importantly 100s of Linux security companies add their own bits of security to multiple systems. One reason Linux is an extremely popular server / data centre OS with companies like Amazon Facebook and MS... is they are free to create their own hardened versions of the kernel and Linux user space... there are of course fully open security projects creating hardened kernels and smaller companies that sell their hardened versions as well. This means what may work to attack say Facebook, won't work to attack Amazon even though they are both running Linux. In contrast if you find your way into one MS system you have found your way into all of them until your in is discovered and patched... and then you have likely months and possibly years because well windows machines are in general a larger PITA to update.

Patching is a major windows issue, windows updates are just plain to slow and it encourages not just regular users to bypass it but also system admins that should know better. On the flip side Linux has built tech into the kernel such as kpatch and kgraft to patch running kernels, making it easier to fully update (even running kernels) making it possible to completely update without rebooting.

I'm going to stop I may be a bit dumb to keep posting this stuff over and over. I feel I have posted a lot more then required about SELinux iptables ALSR proper program execute permissions proper logging and the security advantages of open source lately to make a basic argument. Linux is more secure by design. MS has improved windows sure, but it will simply never be as secure as Linux unless MS is planning to open source windows.

 

[BulletDust]

Ah, the usual us vs them post, as per usual. But hey, you all cannot see that this is one reason folks do not want anything to do with Linux, the toxic community that it engenders.

Lol! Because there's no toxic posts here from Windows users!

Come off it. I use Windows, I'm just being a realist.

 

[auntjemima]

Lol! Because there's no toxic posts here from Windows users!

Come off it. I use Windows, I'm just being a realist.

There really aren't. Have you ever wondered why no one says "toxic windows posters"? Have you EVER seen someone use those words together? Nope, but you certainly see it regarding Linux. Take those blinders off

 

[BulletDust]

There really aren't. Have you ever wondered why no one says "toxic windows posters"? Have you EVER seen someone use those words together? Nope, but you certainly see it regarding Linux. Take those blinders off

Well I'm sure it can look that way when the Linux users are always the ones always getting attacked, and it usually all starts from a simple, harmless post.

No blinkers here my friend, I love operating system's in general, from Windows to AmigaOS to Linux and beyond. There's someone here with an obvious bias, and it's certainly not me.

 

[auntjemima]

Well I'm sure it can look that way when the Linux users are always the ones always getting attacked, and it usually all starts from a simple, harmless post.

No blinkers here my friend, I love operating system's in general, from Windows to AmigaOS to Linux and beyond. There's someone here with an obvious bias, and it's certainly not me.

You say you love them all but your comments don't say that. You often say it's shitty for everything and then when someone claims it's better for games you go "well, sorta but look at all of these superior Linux games! Plus, I hate AAA games anyway, so Windows is basically useless".

 

[BulletDust]

You say you love them all but your comments don't say that. You often say it's shitty for everything and then when someone claims it's better for games you go "well, sorta but look at all of these superior Linux games! Plus, I hate AAA games anyway, so Windows is basically useless".

No, I just know that Windows 10 is massively flawed and state as such, I don't spread the cheeks of MS and blow a gentle, warm breeze up their hole like many on these forums.

If Windows users grew a pair we might actually have a decent version of Windows right now, instead of a mishmash of desktop/touch UI with more and more control being taken away from the user and a useless updating system.

I don't hate Windows, Windows users like yourself I reserve an opinion on, but I don't hate Windows - I also don't sugarcoat a turd.

 

[ChadD]

There really aren't. Have you ever wondered why no one says "toxic windows posters"? Have you EVER seen someone use those words together? Nope, but you certainly see it regarding Linux. Take those blinders off

I have seen plenty of toxic windows defense posts. Toxic windows posters yep have known and had to deal with plenty of them... most of them are clueless and easy to dismiss but there still toxic.

 

[ChadD]

You say you love them all but your comments don't say that. You often say it's shitty for everything and then when someone claims it's better for games you go "well, sorta but look at all of these superior Linux games! Plus, I hate AAA games anyway, so Windows is basically useless".

Well just have to say that's me not bullet. I do hate ms I do hate windows and hope both die. I admit it MS is the worse thing to ever happen to computing. My opinion. Bullet has admited to having a windows machine he uses for games. Defending Linux gaming from toxic windows posters doesn't mean he hates windows... as he has also stated without windows he would be out of work. lol

 

[BulletDust]

I wonder when I claimed that Linux games were 'superior'?

And he tells me I make shit up!

 

[GoldenTiger]

I wonder when I claimed that Linux games were 'superior'?

And he tells me I make shit up!

You've proclaimed that the steam library has all the best windows games even though it has only 25 percent that run on Linux. P. S. Toxic Linux users far and away outnumber toxic windows ones .

 

[Lunar]

Well, here I am having had a busy weekend and just now jumping into the fray. So, let's get started.

First off, there seems to be a lot fluff on both sides here. We've got Linux folks talking about Windows like it's a damned demilitarized zone, and that if you even dare to bring a USB flash drive within close proximity of a USB port the PC will catch on fire, walk around in circles, start praying to Satan, and then attack your firstborn. Then we've got Windows folks all in a tiff trying to claim that Windows is plenty secure for the average user, and just no. I mean come on.

Let's talk Windows security first. Is it great? No. Is it flat out awful making it an unusable mess? No again. It's just kinda there in my experience. Put it behind a good firewall, run some AV/anti-malware, practice safe browsing habits, and you'll be fine. Well, and don't use IE or Edge. But, this is also the problem. Most average users don't do these things. Sure they have a router that acts as a firewall, but in the US at least, it's typically some POS gateway the ISP provides that hasn't had a firmware update in about 5+ years. Then, they have AV, but typically it's Norton or Mcafee that came preinstalled, was activated for a year, expired, and they never renewed it or removed it so that Defender can take over. So, now we have a POS gateway, Windows running without protection, and a user who doesn't know what a cookie is. Not a recipe for success. This is also the average user that BulletDust has tried to present to the Windows "elites" here. He hasn't been trying to say YOU fall into that category, but that the VAST MAJORITY of computer users do. Now, I've also worked in PC repair, and I can tell you that we were never short of work, and the VAST majority (~95%) of the work we performed was virus/malware removal. The amount of crap people get onto their PC's is insane. However, it wasn't all Windows PC's. The majority definitely was, but I've seen some heavily infected Macs as well. In conclusion on Windows security, I personally think it needs work, but it isn't horrendous either. I think it's the largest target, and therefore has the most malicious people looking for its weak points. I've used Windows since 3.11 was top dog, and I've been running Microsoft operating systems since we got our first DOS PC in 1988, I was 4. In that time I have gotten viruses, however that was when I was younger and knew enough about computers to be dangerous. However, the last time I got a virus/malware on my personal machine was MS Blaster when I was running Windows 2000. Since then I've not had any significant threats on my Windows machines, and that was only using Windows Defender, malwarebytes, and safe browsing habits.

Now Linux. As some of you know, I've only recently switched to Linux as my daily driver after years of being a staunch Windows user and supporter. And to clarify, I'm still a fan of Windows, and personally I think Windows 10 is one of the nicest OS' MS has released in years. From a technical standpoint that is. From a telemetry, "we're going to use all your data", standpoint MS can F*** OFF!!! Linux is great. I love it. It's made computing fun for me again, because boy do I miss the good old days of overclocking with dip switches and jumpers, and I do feel like it is far more secure than any other platform out there. That being said however, I don't treat it like it's invulnerable, because it most certainly isn't. I still practice safe browsing habits, I still encrypt sensitive files containing personal information, and I still don't trust anything. That's part of why I don't like Ubuntu world. I have a hard time trusting PPA's. Granted, I run arch (Manjaro specifically), and I do use the AUR, but not for much. So, can we please stop trying to convince ourselves that Linux is the be all end all to information security? It's a great starting point, and it's a hell of a lot better than Windows and OS X, but it isn't infallible. It has it's issues, they just tend to get fixed rather quickly due to the open source nature of it. I'm happy to recommend Linux, evangelize it, and help people with it, but if you believe that it is perfect, then you really need to take the blindfold off and open your eyes. There is no perfectly secure system, and there never will be.

Finally, Chrome OS. Chrome OS is great (not joking). I absolutely love ChromeOS, and could almost use it for everything except for the fact that I've become increasingly concerned with Google's business practices as of late, how they use consumer data, and I still want full control over my OS. Also, games. I'm currently in the process of de-googling my life, so using ChromeOS would be counter to that goal (obviously). That being said however, the concept of ChromeOS really is great, especially for the average consumer. After I got out of the Navy, I worked a brief 6 month stint at Best Buy as a Geek Squad agent. I can't tell you how many Chromebooks I sold to grandparents who just wanted a fast and secure computer that was easy to use so that they could do their banking, budget, and get pictures of grandkids. Not only did I sell a ton of them, but I actually had customers come back to thank me and tell me how much they were enjoying it. So, make fun of ChromeOS all you like, but as a consumer focused OS it is fantastic. It's got Gentoo at it's base, and Chrome powering the UI giving the end user a pleasant and streamlined experience that is reasonably safe and secure.

Well, that was a long one, but I hope you all enjoy the read.

 

[Lunar]

As an addition to my post above I'd also like to point out how hypocritical some people in the computing world have been in regards to Windows. I've seen tech journalists sing the praises of Linux package managers and the Mac App store, yet scream from the rooftops about how MS is killing choice and freedom by creating the Windows Store on Windows 10. It really infuriates me. MS with the Windows Store has the potential to effectively kill the Windows malware problem, yet they can't because of hypocrisy in the tech sphere. I understand the monopoly concerns people have, but a Windows App store really would be one of the biggest and most effective steps MS could take it curbing the malware problem on Windows. That's why I think Windows 10 S will replace Windows 10 Home in the coming years. I think they are trying to get people used to using the store to acquire applications (win32 and RE apps) instead of going to a website and downloading one. Now, it isn't all sunshine and rainbows of course. Win 10S prevents the user from installing a browser other than Edge among other things, but with a little pressure, we could get MS to change that policy (maybe?). Also, at first the Store had some pretty major issues, but I've since used it to install Gears 4, Forza Horizon 3, etc, and it's worked quite well.

 

[ChadD]

As an addition to my post above I'd also like to point out how hypocritical some people in the computing world have been in regards to Windows. I've seen tech journalists sing the praises of Linux package managers and the Mac App store, yet scream from the rooftops about how MS is killing choice and freedom by creating the Windows Store on Windows 10. It really infuriates me. MS with the Windows Store has the potential to effectively kill the Windows malware problem, yet they can't because of hypocrisy in the tech sphere. I understand the monopoly concerns people have, but a Windows App store really would be one of the biggest and most effective steps MS could take it curbing the malware problem on Windows. That's why I think Windows 10 S will replace Windows 10 Home in the coming years. I think they are trying to get people used to using the store to acquire applications (win32 and RE apps) instead of going to a website and downloading one. Now, it isn't all sunshine and rainbows of course. Win 10S prevents the user from installing a browser other than Edge among other things, but with a little pressure, we could get MS to change that policy (maybe?). Also, at first the Store had some pretty major issues, but I've since used it to install Gears 4, Forza Horizon 3, etc, and it's worked quite well.

I agree completely and welcome the MS store and windows -s.

What annoys me to no end is MS defenders, defending windows as this great open platform. Which it has never ever really been.

The sooner MS turns windows into an MS apple like ecosystem... the better for Linux. The true open system.

 

[auntjemima]

I agree completely and welcome the MS store and windows -s.

What annoys me to no end is MS defenders, defending windows as this great open platform. Which it has never ever really been.

The sooner MS turns windows into an MS apple like ecosystem... the better for Linux. The true open system.

Quote one person who says that Windows is a great open system. I'll wait.

What they say is Windows is a great system. Adding words won't make it true.

 

[BulletDust]

You've proclaimed that the steam library has all the best windows games even though it has only 25 percent that run on Linux. P. S. Toxic Linux users far and away outnumber toxic windows ones .

And nowhere there did I say that Linux games were 'superior', why would I claim that?

I claimed that for many a number of titles are now available under Linux making the move from Windows, assuming they're over the issues surrounding Windows 10, that much easier. I also claimed that most of the top 10 under Steam at any one time is covered by Linux. Furthermore I've highlighted on more than one occasion statistics showing that vastly more than 20% of gaming titles are supported under Linux in comparison to Windows, including titles capable of running under Wine.

And yet the assumption is that I have the blinkers on? Someone's got blinkers on, it's not me - I'm just posting facts as I see them.

 

[Lunar]

Quote one person who says that Windows is a great open system. I'll wait.

What they say is Windows is a great system. Adding words won't make it true.

So, that may not be said by anyone here, but it is said by many people in the tech landscape. One who comes to mind is TotalBiscuit. He has referred to the PC (Windows specifically as he doesn't like it) as an open platform. Now, in context he isn't entirely off base in that he is referring to the difference between PC and game consoles in a gaming context. How about Tim Sweeney and his anger at MS for creating the store? I don't believe he ever called Windows an open system, but he did refer to MS attempting to lock out competing stores. Well, from a security standpoint locking out anything but MS approved applications via the store would go a long way to helping secure the system. So, no Windows isn't an open system, but it is in a lot of ways an open platform. Pretty much anyone can write and publish software for Windows without having to go through an approval process, etc.

So, I guess what I'm getting at is choosing the right term is important in this discussion.

Open system = open source goodness like Linux
Open platform = any platform in which the barrier to entry for creating software is low (Windows, Linux, Android, etc)
Closed platform = any platform in which the system and application process is restricted (iOS, Mac OS X nowadays-ish?)

Context is crucially important in all things.

 

[BulletDust]

As an addition to my post above I'd also like to point out how hypocritical some people in the computing world have been in regards to Windows. I've seen tech journalists sing the praises of Linux package managers and the Mac App store, yet scream from the rooftops about how MS is killing choice and freedom by creating the Windows Store on Windows 10. It really infuriates me. MS with the Windows Store has the potential to effectively kill the Windows malware problem, yet they can't because of hypocrisy in the tech sphere. I understand the monopoly concerns people have, but a Windows App store really would be one of the biggest and most effective steps MS could take it curbing the malware problem on Windows. That's why I think Windows 10 S will replace Windows 10 Home in the coming years. I think they are trying to get people used to using the store to acquire applications (win32 and RE apps) instead of going to a website and downloading one. Now, it isn't all sunshine and rainbows of course. Win 10S prevents the user from installing a browser other than Edge among other things, but with a little pressure, we could get MS to change that policy (maybe?). Also, at first the Store had some pretty major issues, but I've since used it to install Gears 4, Forza Horizon 3, etc, and it's worked quite well.

The issue is that some believe that a strength of Windows is being able to install .msi's from any obscure corner of the Internet, when the harsh reality is such a method is outdated and most definitely less secure than a maintained repository.

If MS are serious about security and reducing the infection issues plaguing Windows, a software store is the only way forward.

 

[Lunar]

The issue is that some believe that a strength of Windows is being able to install .msi's from any obscure corner of the Internet, when the harsh reality is such a method is outdated and most definitely less secure than a maintained repository.

If MS are serious about security and reducing the infection issues plaguing Windows, a software store is the only way forward.

I agree, but the problem with that is then it does become a closed platform. Steam becomes non-existent, etc. So yes, security is dramatically improved, but freedom of choice is equally restricted. It's a double-edged sword that Microsoft created themselves. Now granted, I don't think that they created this problem on purpose, but more that it is one that happened over time, and now it's this awful monster that they don't know how to tackle, because if they do restrict things down they will face the same anti-trust issues they faced in the past. The biggest problem with the store and Win 10 S is the restrictions on default applications and competing applications. If they approve Steam as an application on the Windows store, along with Chrome, Firefox, etc then those worries kinda go away. But, then there is the problem of unsigned win32 apps (ie Steam games). If they approve the installation of Steam, but restrict it's ability to install non store applications then the security has a hole. The whole thing is a mess, and I don't really see a good way for MS to get out of it at this point. The only way they could truly get out of it is to completely break win32 compatibility and move on. But, they kinda tried that already with WinRT, and we all saw how well that worked out.

 

[BulletDust]

I agree, but the problem with that is then it does become a closed platform. Steam becomes non-existent, etc. So yes, security is dramatically improved, but freedom of choice is equally restricted. It's a double-edged sword that Microsoft created themselves. Now granted, I don't think that they created this problem on purpose, but more that it is one that happened over time, and now it's this awful monster that they don't know how to tackle, because if they do restrict things down they will face the same anti-trust issues they faced in the past. The biggest problem with the store and Win 10 S is the restrictions on default applications and competing applications. If they approve Steam as an application on the Windows store, along with Chrome, Firefox, etc then those worries kinda go away. But, then there is the problem of unsigned win32 apps (ie Steam games). If they approve the installation of Steam, but restrict it's ability to install non store applications then the security has a hole. The whole thing is a mess, and I don't really see a good way for MS to get out of it at this point. The only way they could truly get out of it is to completely break win32 compatibility and move on. But, they kinda tried that already with WinRT, and we all saw how well that worked out.

The idea of backwards compatibility under Windows doesn't really work anyway, packages do exist that used to run just fine under Windows 95/98 that won't run under Windows 7 (for example). The infection issue under Windows is getting worse by the day, malicious software, viruses, worms and PUP's are being released faster than the malware, A/V package maintainers can keep up - Something has to be done and it may have to be as drastic as removing the ability to install legacy win32 unsigned applications.

I notice MS are doing everything they can with each Windows 10 update, and I commend them for their efforts, but the ability to install any obscure .msi is still a glaring issue.

 

[ChadD]

Quote one person who says that Windows is a great open system. I'll wait.

What they say is Windows is a great system. Adding words won't make it true.

I don't believe I was pointing any fingers to people around these parts. Yes the railing against windows 10 -s based on it closing up windows is something written about in many places. Not just forums. I have read plenty of articles on mainstream computing sites talking about winodws 10 -s and how the move makes windows a closed system... yes they talk as if windows has always been some bastion of open systems.

I'm not always talking about you or the handful of windows boosters I like to argue about around here specifically.

 

[ChadD]

I agree windows only option for security is to move to a closed system. I really do welcome it its the right move for Jane and Joe average that if we are being honest would be served just fine by ChromeOS or Windows 10 -s. A browser + a handful of apps is all most users really need.

For power users truly open systems are the way forward. Linux is the only option really. As for steam disappearing yep... from windows it for sure will. They invested time and money into Linux they should see it through. They should have a long time ago slowed their windows support. Would it have cost them some short term money.. yep but long term there is no future for them on Windows. I know right now they do 95% of there business on windows... no doubt. I also believe that 3/4 of the comes from the types of customers that are going to end up with windows 10 -s machines in the future, when MS kills Windows home... Steam has never stopped supporting Linux but they also need to start pushing hard again.

 

[BulletDust]

I agree windows only option for security is to move to a closed system. I really do welcome it its the right move for Jane and Joe average that if we are being honest would be served just fine by ChromeOS or Windows 10 -s. A browser + a handful of apps is all most users really need.

For power users truly open systems are the way forward. Linux is the only option really. As for steam disappearing yep... from windows it for sure will. They invested time and money into Linux they should see it through. They should have a long time ago slowed their windows support. Would it have cost them some short term money.. yep but long term there is no future for them on Windows. I know right now they do 95% of there business on windows... no doubt. I also believe that 3/4 of the comes from the types of customers that are going to end up with windows 10 -s machines in the future, when MS kills Windows home... Steam has never stopped supporting Linux but they also need to start pushing hard again.

Except MS need to stop using the store as a marketing tactic and they need to understand that people have preferences that don't evolve around MS products or MS products 'skinned' to look like alternate products.

If someone wants to run Chrome, Firefox, Thunderbird or Libreoffice they should be able to do so using the developers native applications.

 

[ChadD]

Except MS need to stop using the store as a marketing tactic and they need to understand that people have preferences that don't evolve around MS products or MS products 'skinned' to look like alternate products.

If someone wants to run Chrome, Firefox, Thunderbird or Libreoffice they should be able to do so using the developers native applications.

If they have non-ms preferences frankly they should be running Linux.

MS has no reason to support valves store or any other. If Valve sells 200 million worth of games MS makes ZERO. If Chrome runs on windows MS looses ad money ditto firefox. We can say we would love MS to leave there system open... but it isn't open and it never really was all that open. If I was a MS share holder I would want MS fighting to get Valve gone... really what value do they generate for MS. If they where gone and the MS store only went up 5% as a MS share holder I would be happy about that. If we are being honest the MS store would go up a lot more then just 5% if valve where gone tomorrow. Valve needs to get back to pushing Linux hard again. They are still developing sure but they aren't really pushing Linux usage like they where either. Long term Windows is not going to be a great platform for valve. Its only a matter of time before MS moves the masses to a windows -s for all. Its in their best interests. MS could care less what Valve or any store other then there's sells. Valve isn't paying royalties or fees of any kind to MS. Valves Gabe ranting and raving sure sounded crazy but what he was on about is still going to happen at some point. I really hope they are stock piling cash, when the time comes they are going to have to push Linux hard.

MS just needs to close it down. Lock it down make it secure. I am fine with that because the only true open OS has always been Linux and the sooner people realize that this BS open windows platform stuff is crap and disengenous the better.

 

[Lunar]

If they have non-ms preferences frankly they should be running Linux.

MS has no reason to support valves store or any other. If Valve sells 200 million worth of games MS makes ZERO. If Chrome runs on windows MS looses ad money ditto firefox. We can say we would love MS to leave there system open... but it isn't open and it never really was all that open. If I was a MS share holder I would want MS fighting to get Valve gone... really what value do they generate for MS. If they where gone and the MS store only went up 5% as a MS share holder I would be happy about that. If we are being honest the MS store would go up a lot more then just 5% if valve where gone tomorrow. Valve needs to get back to pushing Linux hard again. They are still developing sure but they aren't really pushing Linux usage like they where either. Long term Windows is not going to be a great platform for valve. Its only a matter of time before MS moves the masses to a windows -s for all. Its in their best interests. MS could care less what Valve or any store other then there's sells. Valve isn't paying royalties or fees of any kind to MS. Valves Gabe ranting and raving sure sounded crazy but what he was on about is still going to happen at some point. I really hope they are stock piling cash, when the time comes they are going to have to push Linux hard.

MS just needs to close it down. Lock it down make it secure. I am fine with that because the only true open OS has always been Linux and the sooner people realize that this BS open windows platform stuff is crap and disengenous the better.

I agree with most of what you said there, except for the bit about open platform. It isn't a lie. Windows IS and always has been an open platform. Sure the OS itself is closed, but anyone has been able to write software for Microsoft Operating Systems since DOS. The barrier to entry has always been extremely low outside of distribution methods. Up until now, and the potential threat of the Windows Store, distribution has always been the major barrier to entry for small developers. Mainly talking about the shareware/physical media days. So, until MS does actually pull the trigger on completely locking things down Windows IS an open platform whether you want to believe it or not. If I want to make a game for Windows, I don't have to pay MS any money whatsoever. You actually made this point for me in your above post.

If Valve sells 200 million worth of games MS makes ZERO.

If this is true, then MS has at no point in the development process of a game on the Windows platform, received funds from either the developers or Valve. Therefore, it is an open platform. Period. You may not like it, but it is a fact. It's not made up BS, or wishful thinking, it is reality.

EDIT: Formatting change.

 

[ChadD]

MS open systems have almost always had a catch. Go ahead use our APIs but we won't tell anyone how they work so they can port their code to other platforms. APIs like dx have never brought anything to the table over the open APIs other then MS lock in. MS has always played with standards and not properly documented changes they have made to ensure poor translation of software to other platforms. Thankfully internet developers said enough to all the IE activex crap... still not that long ago I ran into another example of a client who was relying on IE only crap.

MS is open in the same way a venus fly trap is. It looks inviting for developers but the more they start exposing MS APIs the more they are trapped by them.

Even when MS appears to be doing something super open like open sourcing .net its really all about folding developers into the MS sphere. If that had worked and developers had flocked to .net I have no doubt MS would have started extending things or some such BS. It is how they have operated since the days of DOS. At one time DOS was very open MS-DOS wasn't the only option, MS made undocumented changes to their "Open" system to kill off the competition. They did the same thing to their corporate customers not long after with their DOS/Windows software on Unix systems. They created a Windows-Unix system and then extended a bunch of software frameworks and APIs without updating to ensure third party software written to their BS open standard would fail or simply run like ass on anything but MS windows.

So I understand what people mean by Windows being an "open platform"... you simply can't trust MS to protect code you write as a third party. Some new version of windows is going to break your code, changes to X or Y API or framework is going to make it harder and harder for you to code features cross platform.

So for me MS moving to end all those third party APIs that allow cross platform coding on their system via a MS store lock in... is perfect. Its what their shareholders want... and as I see it the masses of developers that are sucked into the illusion of open platform may just see the truth of things and move to the only real open platform that doesn't actively stifle cross platform development. I love the way things have been going the last few years... a lot of developers have been moving away from MS frameworks which is great... for full irony its funny to see companies like Adobe using the QT framework for software which MS has paid them to not develop for other platforms.

 

[B00nie]

The amount of malware and viruses constantly written for Windows are a testament to its open nature. There's a huge selection available. Ironically even they stop working either by age or changes to the new versions.

 

[Frobozz]

Side tracking for a moment.. Where's Heatlesssun? These threads have been prime bait and he's nowhere to be found. Anyone hear from him?

 

[auntjemima]

Side tracking for a moment.. Where's Heatlesssun? These threads have been prime bait and he's nowhere to be found. Anyone hear from him?

He was banned for a while because of one of the Soapbox threads. I thought the same thing a few days ago and went looking lol

 

[ManofGod]

He was banned for a while because of one of the Soapbox threads. I thought the same thing a few days ago and went looking lol

Yeah, pretty much a reason I do not even bother subscribing to that part of the forums, even though I can understand supporting Kyle and Company. Just too much garbage goes on over there, at least from what I noticed when I was able to use it during the trial.

 

[BulletDust]

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/10/10/october_2017_microsoft_windows_patch_tuesday/

Wow, just wow.

 

[ChadD]

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/10/10/october_2017_microsoft_windows_patch_tuesday/

Wow, just wow.

I'm sure now we will hear about well these are being patched... and Linux has lots more open bug tickets ect ect. (as will always be the case as ALL the code is in the open).

My take away from going over MS patch lists... how many major issues are only possible via horrid OS design.
"allowing malicious code within it to run with the same rights as the logged-in user" MS still has issues with their word docs. And it seems will always have an issue with major system files being freely open to user accounts that have admin setups.
"visiting a website or opening a file with a specially crafted embedded font can cause malware within the font data to run and hijack the PC."
"The scripting engine in Internet Explorer and Edge has 19 flaws that could allow webpages to achieve remote-code execution, with the logged-on user's permissions" - shocker a bunch of these exploit program memory issues... something MS could easily fix with a proper program memory randimozation routine.
"a remote code execution bug in the Windows DNS client that could be exploited by accidentally connecting to a malicious DNS server" - On this one folks as a Non US computer user I have to say for any windows folks running in browser DNS switching Anti Geolocking type utilities be sure you can trust extension your using... pointed to an iffy DNS even with this one fixed is always a super easy way to pwn your machine.
"here's also flaw in Windows TRIE that lets DLL files achieve remote code execution"

Also have to love this one. If you need Linux people run windows in the VM.
"an object handling error in the Windows Subsystem for Linux that would let a malicious app crash the machine."

I get that Linux has its share of fixes that get released all the time as well... but the ones that actually allow code to elevate itself fully to root are in general rare and involve obscure, specific attack vectors that regular Linux users simply won't be open to. The windows flaws always seem to involve maundane every day vectors like code in docs or injection via a web page font. Sure most of that only gets opened or looked at if your stupid enough to open that email from the high school friend you haven't talked to in 20 years that says "what we talked about yesterday LINK" lol Still the fact that one click and your ass is owned because your using your machine with an Admin level user account with OS files out in the open and programs that run in known (to the bad folks) memory usage routines is 100% all possible because of the bad security design of windows. So many of the windows issues that get patched work in ways that simply wouldn't be possible in other operating systems by core design.

 

[jwcalla]

I've had to go back to using Windows now for work and as awful as Linux it, some things about Windows absolutely drive me up the wall.

It also means I'm back to doing gaming on Windows again, and that's just a whole other CF.

I don't understand why nobody can make a non-retarded OS.

 

[B00nie]

I've had to go back to using Windows now for work and as awful as Linux it, some things about Windows absolutely drive me up the wall.

It also means I'm back to doing gaming on Windows again, and that's just a whole other CF.

I don't understand why nobody can make a non-retarded OS.

The problem is that once the market gets saturated by only one solution, it dictates itself. Once it dictates itself the only motivation for further development becomes how to capitalize it's use into dollars for the shareholders. They don't need to make users especially happy or comply with anything because the whole ecosystem is built around them. They think they're irreplaceable.

I hope history will prove that wrong and Windows will die the miserable death it deserves.

 

[BulletDust]

The problem is that once the market gets saturated by only one solution, it dictates itself. Once it dictates itself the only motivation for further development becomes how to capitalize it's use into dollars for the shareholders. They don't need to make users especially happy or comply with anything because the whole ecosystem is built around them. They think they're irreplaceable.

I hope history will prove that wrong and Windows will die the miserable death it deserves.

I hope it involves fire and public beheadings....

 

[Ur_Mom]

Use what you want to use and what can do what you need it to do. End of story. There is no BEST OS. If my software can't run or I can't use or don't like your OS - it's not the best. I don't care if it's my favorite OS that you can't use. It's not the best for you.

The "My OS is best and your's is stupid" is a trolling game. If something works for someone and they know it, then it's the best for them. Same for you or anyone else.

If you're tired of your OS doing whatever, you can switch. You have options. No worries. No one is going to use your PC but you, so no one else's opinion should matter. Fuck, put OS/2 Warp on there if you want.

I don't care what you run. If you want advice, people will give it to you. If you want to switch to the "superior" OS, go for it.


Except for OSX. That one sucks.

 

[BulletDust]

As far as tools are concerned, technically I find OSX to be a better tool than Windows for a number of reasons. The reality is that in most cases it's not a matter of people using the right tool for the job or even people using the right tool for their usage case, it's people using the only thing they're used to.

Kinda like aiming headlights using a light board as opposed to using an actual modern tool designed for the purpose - Mechanics are the most pig headed people you'll find, they'll cling onto that old method their whole lives knowing only too well the alternative is better but they can't be arsed, or simply don't have the capability, to learn something new.