linux on desktop - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2016, 10:55:24 pm
content: well, actually android on desktop,i have been playing around with remix and phoenix for some time and is quite pleased with both - with remix more refined and phoenix rougher on the edges.i hope google would get into this business and really give ms a run for its money.posted from chrome on remix.

author: XOIIO
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 05, 2016, 11:01:27 pm
content: So basically chrome os? An android like OS will never be able to compete with microsoft because microsoft has such a dominant grip on the market, so many businesses, their applications, etc, are made to run on windows.Besides, there are so many linux distros out there, and the amount you can customize them, even if you don't want to build them up from scratch, it wouldn't be worth it for google to try and roll out their own desktop OS.A simplified desktop os which would appeal to users the way max os does would also involve saving all your data and installing the new os, but people looking for that simplified experience would likely not be comfortable doing this.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 12:51:06 am
content: Been running Linux on desktop for several years now, it's nice to break away from MS, but it does come at a cost. I find it can be really glitchy at times. I have a few very annoying glitches I've been putting up with, been debating on upgrading to another distro just to get rid of them. I'd also like to see better multi monitor support given it's a geek oriented OS. It's not that it's worse than windows, it's that it's not better, and it should be. I hate how some programs/dialogs open on the wrong monitor. This is a big issue in Windows too.As for Android, I would not touch that with a 10 foot pole for desktop. It's bad enough that Google spies on me on my phone but I don't have a choice, it's that or Apple. But no way would I let them on my desktop.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:58:57 am
content: Seems to me that switching your OS from Microsoft to Google is kind of like jumping from the frying pan into the fire. You get burned either way of course.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 03:01:36 am
content: I use both, but the latest windows i have is windows server 2012 which i really hate because it freezes when i try to install GPU drivers so i can run openCL on GPUs in some sort of server fashion. On linux this issue doesnt exist but every OS has its problem.Windows 10 - network security, driversubuntu - arrogance (you cant use fake raid with it anymore and they dont want to fix it, but other linux distros have)other linux distros - software compatibility. Most software made for linux is made for ubuntu.android - suffers from performance and feature issues even on high end hardware, needs lots of tweaking to get right (see CM) or trying to use ethernet on it.I use opensuse, windows 7, windows server 2012 r2Even for linux a simple failure can be difficult to deal with. For example just to get something done on linux you have to take a lot of steps however linux admins are were more than ms admins.OSX is unix based and suffers from apple's greed of locking hardware, compatibility and so on.Oracle solaris is unix based too and is more like linux but for some odd reason people dont look at them. Sun used to produced really good hardware and cpu architecture (sparc) with a good OS (Sun solaris) that would still run even if the main system had crashed. They were used in various critical fields like medical, defence, etc.

author: Ampera
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 03:17:42 am
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 06, 2016, 03:01:36 amTo my knowledge, Linux Mint (My secondary driver) runs most Ubuntu applications.So does Debian.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 03:22:53 am
content: I've got a few USB sticks laying around with persistent installs of Linux bootable systems (Mint, Slax, Ubuntu Studio). I tried Android (Remix) and it was sluggish on my system. Also, during a reboot it crashed my system and killed the USB drive I was running it off, and I had to reprogram the Phison controller on it to get it recognizable by my system again, so that put me off the whole Android on my PC attempt.As far as Linux goes, I enjoy using the various Linux distros but for various reasons have not dual installed to the HD yet... I just run it off a USB stick to play around with it. I am running Win 7 on my laptop and I'm mainly using a few older Windows programs and they are serving me well (Office XP, Adobe Photoshop 7.0, Adobe Reader 7.0, Google Chome, and various other freeware or GNU apps). Since all my programs are considered "vintage" they run blazingly fast and I keep overhead on Win 7 to a minimum.I have been trying to live only with Linux but unfortunately due to a few legacy applications I need, I will still have to have a Windows environment even in Linux... so something like WINE. Meanwhile I am continuing to explore Linux and when I learn enough about it I will make the jump perhaps on another machine. As it is, I am downloading many Windows/Linux-available apps (like Libre Office, Open Office, GIMP, VLC, etc...) and familiarizing myself with them, so I know that when I switch to Linux I will already know how to use all those apps.My kids are playing around on the RasPi and I intend to expose them to a Linux environment from the start so they will learn it inside-out. It helps that whenever I give them my old computer, I can fresh-install Linux on it and it runs remarkably fast and tends to be more secure and easier to keep clean of issues too... So Linux is better for them.

author: XOIIO
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 04:05:48 am
content: If you guys want a nice lightweight desktop that still looks pretty nice, xubuntu has a really pleasing background and, well, average linux UI I'd say, but the background really sold me on it lol, and it runs on shitty netbooks quite nicely.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 12:57:38 pm
content: dual booting off raid 0 SSDs is nice. What i do in my desktop is have swap on raid 0 WD blacks and dual boot on raid 0 SSDs. The performance is so much better.I find windows 8 and 10 variants dont run the software i need well. Ubuntu(even variants) is out of the question till they sort out their mdadm issues, opensuse on the other hand have so now its a question of putting a few machines in cloud config using opensuse. I did try ubuntu cloud but all those restrictions and mdadm issues just delayed and hurt things. Debian and ubuntu have differed a lot so you cant run ubuntu stuff on debian and vice versa. Some things may be compatible but most arent.raspberry pi's raspbean OS is debian based which runs stuff i want and easily does the things i want it to do which ubuntu cant.ubiquiti edgerouters can run debian software as they are debian based but they have to be compiled for 64 bit MIPS, though they dont stack well working with the stock OS networking stuff. I would not suggest ubiquiti edgerouters if performance is something you need as the moment you start using QoS you're restricted to below 200Mb/s speeds and thats how fast i would rate the ERPRO at as thats the fastest you will also get running squid on it. So for my main router i use mikrotik's CCR which runs some linux as well, once hacked i will have a many core linux machine to run stuff from such as apache which the architecture is known to be good at.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:01:26 pm
content: I'm pretty happy with my 3 x Samsung 950 pro M2 in raid, transfer is quick, extremelly quick

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:06:44 pm
content: Quote from: ebclr on September 06, 2016, 01:01:26 pmPutting an OS on them, even quicker booting and software starts. because my SSDs are sata3 they can bench at 1GB/s of faster while DDR3 ram is about 8GB/s. m.2 SSDs however seem to be much slower, about hard drive speeds in data but with faster response.If you want performance from your hard drives, create a small partition at the start of the drive. That smaller partition will have faster response and transfer speeds with more consistency, essentially the first part of the drive is at the outer edge of the disc.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:19:39 pm
content: I feel my m2 raid are really very slow , only 1.29Gb /s

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:19:52 pm
content: true but i personally like openSUSE as it survives the hard times it has gone through like when my hardware is unstable and crashes. Never had any arrogance that ubuntu has. Their recent distro background however is interesting. I would advice beginners to avoid ubuntu as while it may have been the OS of choice for beginners before it is now broken when you want to use it for anything important. Imagine the anger of admins when they set up their own hardware or fake raid to install ubuntu server/cloud on their servers that utilise hardware raid only to find out that it fails with no workarounds. I've commonly seen server owners using raid 1 on the board itself for putting the OS and cards for the drives which they either use hardware or software RAID. So ubuntu works if you dont use hardware raid which is what most dont realise until they try to install ubuntu on fake raid for the purpose of dual booting.

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:22:10 pm
content: I still use a Windows 8.1 desktop but all it does is run Chrome, PuTTY, foobar2000 and LTspice and doesn't shaft battery life quite as much as Linux seems to.PuTTY points to a metric ton of CentOS boxes on AWS (the day job).If I had to pick a desktop it would be Ubuntu Mate. Only because it isn't Unity, isn't newfangled turd Gnome and isn't a tiling window manager (which is pointless when all you do is run tmux in a terminal!)

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:34:44 pm
content: ubuntu is broken so it uses more battery.other linux distros including ones you have to build yourself allow you to configure for good battery life. The way that linux and windows scheduling works is different. One is time based (CPU wakes up every constant time to handle interrupts and stuff) and the other is event based (any interrupt or stuff wakes CPU up).the reason why osx has such good battery life on mac is the same reason, unix/linux are actually better for battery but they require configuration so it is tedious but osx already has it configured from the factory.So either OS can have good battery life depending on what you run on it. Just like with my phone getting samsung s4 1 week battery life because i dont have those terrible apps like facebook constantly waking up trying to check for updates which makes my screen the most battery hogging device on the phone.

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 01:45:32 pm
content: I've got a nice bit of hardware, a ThinkPad X220. I've tried CentOS 6, 7, Debian 7, 8, Ubuntu going back as far as 11.04. Get 8h15m on a 9-cell on Windows 8.1 Pro. Get 5h10m absolutely max on a 9-cell on Linux with all the PM optimisations i.e. powertop done.The killer is Firefox and/or Chrome which are wakeup heavy on Linux compared to windows. If I don't browse at all, I can screw 9h out of Linux but I usually have 10-20 tabs open.Also Windows scheduler is similar now as of NT 6.2 due to all the changes they fumbled into it as part of the ARM port of NT and the winmin effort.

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 02:03:29 pm
content: This is Intel graphics and the drivers are pure shit. Periodically someone drops an xorg or kernel update out that kills it entirely or leads to display corruption.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 06, 2016, 02:21:10 pm
content: Android is based on linux, but it's not linux. And I woudn't install a "we collect all your data, upload it to our cloud and track everything you do" OS on my PC.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 07, 2016, 12:00:40 am
content: I tolerate android on the mobile because its the lessor of the three evils. You can run Android without signing into google if you want to.ChromeOS is making its way into the schools it seems. I just had to order a chromebook so I could provide support for my daughter since the school forces them to use it.myself I'm old skool, Slackware is the distro of choice. No distro/package caused incompatibilities since I have to build it myself. I think I had one stability issue one time back in 2005 but haven't had any issues since.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 10, 2016, 08:54:29 pm
content: I'm currently trying to configure an old Windows XP DESKTOP system with 2GB ram into a dual-boot machine using Lubuntu for my kids to use. It's an Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 @ 2.33 GHz, 2GB RAM, Win XP SP3 machine with a 475gb HD currently partitioned into a 127 GB drive C: and 337 GB drive E:.I'm trying to move everything from E: onto C: and then have Lubuntu on the second partition after the Windows partition. Hopefully the Lubuntu 16.04 ISO (which I've burned to DVD since this old machine doesn't support boot from USB) has all the tools needed to do this, since I plan on booting from the Lubuntu DVD and having it install the dual-boot loader and set up the 2nd partition (which will be empty) into a Linux drive for itself.Also, I'm hoping Lubuntu will let me install all of the packages available for regular Ubuntu. I only did this because the machine is older and I want my kids booting into a fresh Linux install, but I don't want to kill our old WinXP installation since there are tons of programs on there and data we may wish to work with in the future (all backed up obviously). Also, if they get familiar with Lubuntu and the apps for it, I have an easier time later as we play more with the RasPi and also less chance of viruses and other problems, I would assume.Right now I'm typing this from the old machine... first thing was to get my old Linksys WMP54GV4 Wi Fi PCI card in there and see if I can connect to the house WiFi, since it was previously only on a wired LAN connection. Turns out the XP drivers weren't easily come by from LinkSys but I found a package somewhere and was able to get the WiFi working. The machine will be in the kids room and so I need them to have WiFi access.Next step... Booting the Lubuntu DVD and seeing how to get a dual-boot config going![UPDATE:]Success! I am typing this from Firefox running on Lubuntu booted off the HD. When I installed it asked to keep existing WinXP installation, so it kept the first partition 137 GB, and then divided up the remaining 360 MB partition into 2 partitions... 181 Data partition and 182 GB extended partition, of which 180 is filesystem and 2 GB is swap. Upon reboot I have the option to go by default into Lubuntu, or I can select my old WinXP installation and it works just fine. My Wifi PCI card recognized by both, seems to work ok.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 10, 2016, 10:12:16 pm
content: You didn't really have to use Lubuntu. Almost any Linux would run fine on that machine. As a matter of fact, you might want to try installing some of the others. You may like them better. A Linux install doesn't need much drive space.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 10, 2016, 11:58:34 pm
content: QuoteYou may also try Puppy: very small footprint (a few hundred MB) and runs well on old laptops.As to dual booting: on newer windows, dual booting renders the clock to UTC and Windows doesn't sync it anymore. Pain in the butt.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 03:32:18 am
content: Thanks for the suggestions. I did check out Puppy linux and some other distros, even the full Ubuntu, and Ubuntu Studio. The main reason I went for Lubuntu is that it uses a lighter/faster/simpler desktop environment but has a software center that lets me get the full range of Ubuntu depository software. Also, I was worried about some other distros not having easy-to-use installers and dual-boot configuration utilities. Being a Linux noob... I liked the fact that Lubuntu had the install parallel to Windows option, I didn't have to think about anything or use any partition managers, it just did everything at the click of a button during installation, which was fast.Also, having the software center also makes it a breeze adding more stuff... Like as I'm writing this post in Firefox on Lubuntu, I'm downloading LibreOffice, GIMP and a few other packages in the background. I was amazed at how much software there is, and I don't have any clue about most of it. But the fact that it's there and Lubuntu has software updater to keep the system current, and other such things helps.My experience with Linux in the past was more painful. I don't remember it being as easy and having as many tools easy to install. I remember having to get software packages and their dependencies, and use the make command, and compile them on the machine. They would come as TAR.GZ files and all that stuff was done through command-line. I'm sure the modern tools do that in the background, but it is way easier today for a Noob to function perfectly fine on something like Lubuntu or Ubuntu without ever seeing the command-line or having to know more than on a Windows machine!Also, with the use of Live CD/DVD and USB bootable versions, it is easier than ever to try before installing to the HD. And with more and more cloud-based computing and services, and people using tablets and ChromeBooks to access the web for most tasks, then even the most basic "lite" Linux machine can easily serve the computing habits of probably 90% of most users.Just having a browser alone and a WiFi connection satisfies most users. They have access to all their favorite social media sites, YouTube, Google and so on. Add on LibreOffice and they can all their Office file stuff. Lots of email utilities, but most people will check on the web. Media and music players abound... VLC alone can let you play almost everything. Gaming not so much... and if you need things like iTunes then forget about it. Printer drivers may still be hard to come by also. But for my kids in primary school, this Lubuntu machine will rock!I'm installing Scratch for them to play with (a kid's programming environment), which is familiar to them as they have already tried it on the Raspberry Pi. They will have their web browser to access school homework, some drawing and media programs, music players, LibreOffice and so on... More than what they will need for a long long time. All on a machine that was collecting dust otherwise for the past 5 years.

author: retiredcaps
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 04:27:10 am
content: Quote from: edy on September 10, 2016, 08:54:29 pmI bought a handful of 5-10 year old CPUs that were the fastest at its time back in 2006 to 2010 for $5 CDN each. For certain things, it was big improvement.If your motherboard supports it, you can find a E8500 or E8400 for about $5 CDN that will give about 25% increase. Whether you see it or not in normal use is debateable because Lubuntu runs the CPU in low speed mode most of of time. On my Core 2 Duo E5800, my CPU runs at around 1.6Ghz most of time which is half of the rated 3.2Ghz.PS. I also settled on Lubuntu for my own usage at home.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 07:56:46 am
content: Puppy is great for things like making a secure computer, as all of the OS and applications can run in RAM after the boot, so you can remove the install media and simply turn it off after use, leaving no state between boots. Thus no way ( unless you save state deliberately) for malware to creep on board unless it was there from the beginning.some nigglies are the default ways it sets up the UI, but those can be either changed and saved for the next session , or worked around.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 06:05:42 pm
content: My kids are liking the Lubuntu installation on the Desktop PC. Meanwhile, I managed to drag an old Dell Inspiron 7500 laptop from the basement that had Ubuntu 6.06 (Dapper Drake) installed a few years back and collecting dust. Yup... this is TURN OF THE CENTURY TECH! Around 16 years old now. Looks something like this:This is a Pentium III 700 Mhz machine with 127MB RAM with an 11 GB hard drive. This heavy beast long stopped working on batteries, it is plug-in only. But it comes with a DVD drive and a ZIP drive. Suprisingly, I got a Wireless-G Dynex PCMCIA card to work with it after some late nights looking for Ubuntu drivers, and I can browse the web and even play MP3's and watch AVI movies on it. Given the age of the machine and "low" specs, it is managing quite well.The only problem is, the Ubuntu repositories have since long expired so I was forced to change the sources.list file entries all from "us.archives" to "old-releases", as is shown in this blog:http://blog.nowherelan.com/category/linux/ubuntu-linux/ubuntu-6-06-lts-dapper-drake/Why am I doing this? Well I was hoping to install the XFCE desktop environment because it is using Gnome Desktop and it is a bit sluggish. Also, there is no LXDE release for Dapper Drake so I can't find a Lubuntu release old enough to install (also I don't want to necessarily wipe out the machine as I may have trouble getting it configured back up with the WiFi card). So first I tried doing:sudo apt-get install lubuntu-desktop (didn't work)sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktop (did something... then aborted due to errors)After changing my source list to all the old respositories, I opened up Synaptic Package Manager and found xubuntu entries (a few of them) listed so I'm NOW installing them. I'd like to try it instead of Gnome and see if it makes a difference.By the way (AS AN ASIDE).... I'm typing this post using the new Microsoft "Edge" browser that comes with Win10 at an office and noticed that I can't get the EMOTICONS to work. Clicking on them doesn't make them insert, neither do any of the formatting buttons, and also there is strangeness with the cursor travel when I type. Anyone else notice this with Edge on Win10?

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 06:26:46 pm
content: That's pretty cool. I still have my first 2 computers, An IBM Aptiva 486DX2 and a Micron Pentium Pro 200. I haven't turned either of them on in nearly 10 years, but the last time I did they still worked.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 06:36:29 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 05, 2016, 10:55:24 pmThat's what Chromebooks were about, but because of their business model they have to combine it with datamining for it to be interesting for them.Chromebooks make nice Linux laptops if you don't mind jumping a few hurdles though (disabling hardware write protection by removing a screw and reflashing the bios).

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 07:34:49 pm
content: I used Dapper for nearly a decade, it runs nicely and works well on most older hardware. Yes, I agree with you about the issues with getting Dapper to work with some network and wifi cards, Ndiswrapper was not always something that you could get to work reliably, and quite often it would break and have to be redone after some updates.I upgraded to Mint17 the easy way, just installed on a clean drive, then simply used the old drive and ( after the 2 hours of decrypting it) and copied over .home in its entirity, after using Synaptic to get the list of installed programs and importing into the new machine and installing. then a reboot and everything worked flawlessly aside from a few tiny niggles from changed data formats. Firefox opened up with the old tabs still intact......

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 09:06:08 pm
content: QuoteTo match it, you need to install some really old Linux on it,One of those days, I will dug up some really old Linux CDs from the earlier 1990s, and try them on a dual Xeon machine just for fun,

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 09:45:30 pm
content: After a lot more time trouble-shooting, I managed to get Xubuntu installed on my Ubuntu Dapper Drake 6.06 install. First, I changed all the sources.list over to the old-releases (from us.archives) links for repositories using the Synaptics Software Manager. It seemed to install, yet it did not load it.So then I went back to the command-line and tried again: sudo apt-get install xubuntu-desktopIt seemed to download more stuff, but it kept asking for the /cdrom/ (which I couldn't find). I was about to download the full ISO for Dapper-Drake again but then I realized I could just "#" it from the sources.list as well, and it wouldn't bother me asking for it all the time (it would then just rely on the repositories for everything).So I ran the install for xubuntu-desktop AGAIN and it finally downloaded and installed a bunch of stuff. When I rebooted, I had the option to boot into either Gnome or XFCE during login!Then I realized I couldn't get my Wifi working in XFCE. When in Gnome Ubuntu, I had the nm-applet available and it was a little icon near the corner of the screen, I click and it would show me all available Wifi connections. But with XFCE I had nothing. So I tried to install something called "WiFi-radar" which showed me available networks but wouldn't properly let me connect.So finally after some random poking around the system I wound up in the "/sbin" folder and found a couple of executables called "wpa_passphrase" and "wpa_supplicant". I typed in the command:wpa_passphrase <SSID> <password> (e.g. wpa_passphrase "My Home Wifi" "this is pwd")Then I ran wpa_supplicant and to my suprise a little network icon (similar to the nm-applet) showed up in the corner of the screen. I am not sure whether this was from what I was typing or just started as a side-effect. Also, prior to that I was typing "nm-applet" on the command line also, so maybe that started up too?Anyways, whatever I did... it worked and so I was able to click on the little WiFi applet (like I did before with nm-applet) and select my Wifi SSID in the list, type in the password again and connect. That's why I think perhaps I must have activated the nm-applet from the command-line a few minutes earlier without knowing, and the wpa_passphrase and wpa_supplicant may have not really done anything. So now I'm posting this under XFCE desktop environment running on Ubuntu Dapper Drake 6.06 on which I can use GNOME or XFCE. See the attached screenshots! It feels a bit faster.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 11, 2016, 10:15:36 pm
content: My oldest I still have is a Dell Latitude C400 from 2002. It still runs the current release of Slackware (14.2), just the same as my newer machines.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 04:44:19 am
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 06, 2016, 01:06:44 pmHoly hell, your SSDs can speed a 600MB/s interface up past 1GB/s?!

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 05:09:46 am
content: I'm going Linux CRAZY.... So now I just installed Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS on my wife's machine (HP Pentium Dual-Core T4200 @ 2.00GHz x 2 with 3.8 GiB RAM and 300 GB HDD, 64-bit). Firstly, the HP laptop had a 290 GB windows partition C:, and another 10 GB "recovery" partition D:. So the windows partition had a ton of free space so I used Windows Disk Partition manager to "shrink" the C: partition (after defragmenting) so I made about a 90 GB empty partition out of the tail end of the C: partition. Then when I installed Ubuntu (from a USB drive) it found the empty partition and chopped the empty 90 GB partition up into a filesystem and swap partition and went ahead and installed with dual-boot along-side Windows.So now I have a 200 GB windows partition, 90 GB for Ubuntu (I think it's split into 80/10 for filesystem/swap) and then the original recovery partition D: on the end of the drive gives us another 10 GB for a total of 300 GB.Now it took a bit of time to get used to the Unity Desktop. I was expecting something Gnome-like, so I'm not a huge fan but now that I am getting to know it better, it's not bad. Reminds me of Mac OS and maybe the new Windows 10 look. First thing is I installed the Unity Desktop Utility, then made the application bar go to the bottom of the screen and shrink all the icons and font down. Next, I installed "classmenu-indicator" which inserts a Gnome-like menu attached near the icons at the top left.I also made a "shortcut" on the desktop to her Windows desktop/documents folders, where she kept all her Windows stuff. So she has access to the same files from either Windows 7 or an Ubuntu boot, whatever she prefers to use. Now to get the HP network printer working, I installed something called HPLIP but I will have to work on it a bit.So the experiment has started.... my wife's laptop, and kids desktop, and my old laptop all with Ubuntu.... we may actually become a Microsoft Windows-free family.Here is a screenshot attached. Recognized WiFi, power management, pretty much everything on this laptop works straight out of the box.

author: Srbel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 12:28:22 pm
content: Bodhi Linux is very light (good for really old computers), and it looks not bad too. But it is a bit buggy.http://www.bodhilinux.com/Also, there is a Gnome flawor of Ubuntu, called Ubuntu Gnome.https://ubuntugnome.org/

author: amspire
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 12:46:44 pm
content: Quote from: edy on September 12, 2016, 05:09:46 amI am not sure if 16.04.1 is solid enough yet. For example, it is very easy to run into library version mismatches and missing libraries if you need to install MySQL or MariaDB along with other programs. These MySQL library bugs have not been fixed yet. Problems with MySQL is an indicator that there is still a lot of work needed to strengthen 16.04.1. It is not bad for a server without a GUI interface if the programs you need are compatible, but it is not ready for workstations yet.14.04 is now really solid, but the standard repositories has a lot of out-of-date programs. Usually, there are custom repositories with current versions of many programs. I haven't done much with 15.04, but it is probably the one I would try for now for a solid workstation.Also if you start installing lots of programs and doing regular dist-upgrades, the lightweight desktops can be fragile. You can find Ubuntu refusing to boot to desktop after an upgrade. A choice like the Gnome desktop is reliable.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 01:20:06 pm
content: "we may actually become a Microsoft Windows-free family."Being Windows free shouldn't have been the goal, though it may be the result of getting to your goal.I have Been using various Linux products since early 1990s (and various UNIX varients, including xenix from Microsoft in the 1980s). I would say that for what I do, I would never be nearly as productive on a Linux machine as I would on a Windows machine.I didn't set out to work in a Windows environment. I end up working in a Windows environment as it maximizes productivity for me.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 01:57:50 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 12, 2016, 01:20:06 pmI agree, the goal was not to become MS-Windows free, but it is turning out that way because at least for my wife and kids... their computer app requirement is quite limited in scope. All of the tools they need are now much more mature on Linux. Many people these days get by on their phone or a tablet, for almost all of their computing needs. Some will use a ChromeBook. That's because most if not all of their computer software needs are being met by these environments.Personally, at work and for my own use I am stuck on Windows 7 for the most part because it has software that I cannot yet find an equivalent for in Linux. So I don't see myself going "Windows-free" any time soon.However, I think the big push (at least for me) has been the ever-easier Linux installer system, ability for drives to auto-mount, the ability to have dual-boot, software package managers, live USB or CD/DVD systems. I know these are not "new"... but I remember playing years ago with Linux and was turned off because of the difficulty. Since contemplating whether to upgrade to Windows 10 or stay on Win 7, I started exploring Linux again... and was pleasantly surprised. This has helped n00bs like me be more comfortable trying it out and not being scared.I'm still dual-booting though... because my needs are not completely met by either system alone. I may install WINE and see how that works for some of my favourite apps. For now, it's a Windows/Ubuntu mix for the family.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 03:09:59 pm
content: Just a quick note on what my wife and kids need as far as apps, and most of my daily use as well... to put it into perspective. I will list it in order of priority:1. Modern browser/Internet-networking/Wifi capabilities:- able to handle Gmail, YouTube, social media sites, etc...- that means modern security protocols, media integration, HTML5, etc. (Flash not needed)- basically, all the functionality of a tablet/phone browser... Webkit- since so many services are in the Cloud these days (Email, etc.) this is the key2. Media/document viewing apps:- TO play videos (AVI, MP4, MPG), music (MP3) and handle photos- VLC, movie player, etc... to handle downloaded media- Photo viewers, photo editors like GIMP and such- easy to mount/copy/paste from external USB devices, phones, cameras- PDF viewer3. Productivity/Printing:- Any Office-compatible suite (LibreOffice, OpenOffice, etc)- Any media editor (video, music)- paint programs GIMP, drawing Krita, desktop publishing Scribus- ability to interface with a printer, and to output PDF documents is important- CD/DVD burning (secondary because these days it's all on HDD/sticks, not really important)4. Gaming and Developer/Programming- not so important, but for the kids they need a few games to play- also for the kids I'd like them to be able to learn simple programming, science, etc.So based on these requirements, a modern Linux distro should satisfy most if not all. The main problems I see are issues with hardware compatibility (with networking, video cards, drivers) and peripherals (like printers, scanners, other USB devices, etc). If somehow the Windows drivers can work on Linux or there are Linux drivers, then hopefully that is not an issue either. Software-wise I am not disappointed with the latest versions of many of the major apps I've seen on Linux.

author: suicidaleggroll
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 12, 2016, 03:13:19 pm
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 06, 2016, 01:06:44 pmWhat are you smoking?SATA 3 = 600 MB/s theoretical max, ~500 MB/s realistic max.M.2 supports PCIe x4, which can hit around 4 GB/s. The 950 Pro that was mentioned in the post you were responding to can hit real world speeds of 1.5 GB/s write and 2.5 GB/s read, a full 4x faster than SATA 3 is even theoretically capable of.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 01:13:57 am
content: Quote from: Monkeh on September 12, 2016, 04:44:19 amEach sata3 interface is 600MB/s. Combined they give you 1.2GB/s. It really depends on the chipset whether they use seperate or shared channels.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 02:47:48 am
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 14, 2016, 01:13:57 amWhich is still glacier-like compared to M.2.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 03:06:03 am
content: I had a chance to show my girls (age 9 and 7) how to use their "new" Lubuntu computer today. They enjoyed using it and started exploring several apps. I'm sure by the end of the week they will be doing stuff I never thought of. Kids learn fast! I created separate "desktop" user accounts for each, so they have their own home dirs and I showed each of them how to customize their background already (of course, it has to do with puppies).A funny thing though, even though I do not have auto-login enabled for my account (which is administrator), when you turn on the computer it by default opens directly into my account without any login screen! Turns out there are a couple of places you have to look and comment out the autologin information: /etc/lxdm/default.conf (which didn't work for me) and /etc/lightdm/lightdm.conf (which did). I guess my version of Lubuntu is using lightdm, not lxdm.Anyways, now they know how to turn on/off the computer, log in, navigate around the menus and load some apps, save their work files, etc. and each has their own accounts. There still are a few glitches but thankfully a quick Google search usually brings up a solution. I imagine it is also a more secure system not as liable to viruses or getting exploited by malware, trojans, etc. I still need to teach the kids on who to safely compute but I feel better knowing that historically speaking, Linux has been a much safer environment from the risk of infection than Windows.

author: Srbel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 05:51:07 am
content: I have been using Ubuntu for 4,5 years and I did not have a single malware infection.

author: retiredcaps
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 06:40:15 am
content: Quote from: edy on September 14, 2016, 03:06:03 amDuring installation, it asks whether you want autologin enabled or not.QuoteIt changed sometime around 12.04 if I remember reading the docs correctly.QuoteLXDE is pretty much in non development mode. The LXDE team is moving to LXQT, but Lubuntu hasn't moved over to LXQT yet. It might in 18.04?http://lxqt.org/The GUI to create/admin multiple users is broken in Manjaro's implementation of LXQT.QuoteI suggest1) sudo ufw enablethis turns on the firewall on Lubuntu, it is off by default2) disable flash in your browser3) use an adblocker like ublock origin4) for most people, you can safely remove or disable these services/programs without affecting the functionality of lubuntusudo apt-get purge ppp modemmanager whoopsie apport bluezThis will save some DRAM, speedup loading a bit and reduce the attack vector/surface area to exploits.I have been using Lubuntu daily since XP supported ended April 2014.

author: Kalvin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2016, 07:12:34 am
content: I have been using Linux Mint / Ubuntu (with MATE-style desktop) on various desktops and laptops for the last 10+ years without any major problems. During that time period the Ubuntu / Linux Mint and the applications have improved considerably. Unfortunately some of the development tools run still only in Windows, but the VirtualBox has been serving me just great. The minor problems I have had are relating the printer / scanner support which has required some tweaking during installation.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 01:36:31 am
content: Quote from: Srbel on September 14, 2016, 05:51:07 amThere are actually viruses that work on linux. They not only corrupt files but this one actually infects the system. An example is finspy.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 01:45:16 am
content: There are virus' for any system, nothing is 100% secure. Everything is varying levels, and Linux is much safer than Windows.That being said I can;t recall ever getting an actual virus on either windows or Linux on any of my personal systems. I ran windows from the early 90's (3.1) to XP in 2002 then Linux from 2002 on. The biggest issue with windows was malware that could infect IE, I might have still been using Windows if they didn't integrate such a big security hole into the OS just to win a court case. I got hit a couple times there.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 01:46:59 am
content: "Linux has been a much safer environment from the risk of infection than Windows."Likely because of Linux smaller user base and their experimental nature to the owners - IE people are trying them out, not as daily drivers.It wouldn't surprise me there are tons of Linux installations running naked, as your experience shows. So if presented with comparable attacks, an average Linux system would fare worse than an average Windows system.

author: suicidaleggroll
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 02:33:03 am
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 15, 2016, 01:46:59 amI highly doubt it. All of Linux, development and operation, is multi-user oriented and focused on on privilege limitation and isolation. Unless an absolute idiot is running the machine, the worst that will happen with an infection is a user's home directory might be compromised, which isincrediblyeasy to back up, clean, and restore. With literallyone commandyou can wipe the entire infection out and restore from a recent backup, without affecting any other users on the system or even requiring a reboot.Windows (other than enterprise versions) is designed for a single admin user who can do anything they want. It's stupid easy for an infection to take hold and spread through the system, and impossible to clean without complicated, intrusive (and often expensive) 3rd party software, and even then you can't be sure.One of the main differences I see is the attitude behind software installation. With Windows, nothing is included other than a few mostly useless dummy programs, and nothing is offered from any kind of centralized, screened source. Instead, if the user wantsanypiece of software, they have to venture out on the web, download something from a website, and then blindly run it with admin privileges and hope for the best. All it takes is one reputable source putting money first (eg: SourceForge a while back decided to bundle malware with their Windows programs in order to get some more revenue) and boom, system compromised. Same goes for updates. Windows handles its own security updates, butevery singlepiece of software you install has to fend for itself. This either leaves tens/hundreds of "auto-update" utilities that auto-start on boot and run continuously, or the user has to constantly keep track of their program versions, exposed vulnerabilities, and they have to manually go update them if necessary, and reboot after each fucking one. Keeping on top of it could be a full time job.With Linux, 99% of the software you might want is available from a centralized, secured, and verifiable repository. You don't have to think twice about where it's coming from or what it will do to your machine if you install it. One command and done. Updates are all done through the same source, one command and everything is updated with all security and bug fixes available.All of this means that not only is it much easier for an infection to take hold on Windows, it's also MUCH MUCH easier for it to get on the machine in the first place, due to outdated and vulnerable software, and the fundamental requirement that users travel out to insecure third party websites to download and run, with admin privilege, closed-source blobs to add even the mostbasicof functionality to the system.

author: Srbel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 07:58:27 am
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 15, 2016, 01:36:31 amI know. But I did not have any. And Linux is open source, so vulnerabilities get discovered and patched fast.

author: hendorog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 10:19:02 am
content: Some interesting market share points:* Linux overall desktop computer market share is very low (~1.5%)* Linux market share is much higher amongst developers than other desktop users (~22%)* Linux based web client market share is high (~32%)* Linux based web server market share is high (~35%)Source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systemssuicidaleggroll summed up the technical advantages of linux very well. I can see Microsoft adopting the Linux model of package management in the future for Windows (https://chocolatey.org/). I can't see Linux ever adopting the Windows model.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 10:43:58 am
content: "Linux market share is much higher amongst developers than other desktop users (~22%)"Developers of what?In the MCU world, that percentage is nill.I do know people using Mac to develop embedded software for phones and those people overwhelmingly run a VM copy of Windows. Creepy to me.

author: hendorog
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 10:59:13 am
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 15, 2016, 10:43:58 amHaha, there is more going on than MCU development...But I agree with your point, the electronics field is strongly biased to Windows. People even still pay for compilers for MCU's. Its a smaller market.

author: Omicron
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 12:08:00 pm
content: For me the reason I mostly switched to Linux is that more and more of the projects I do involve running Linux on an embedded device. The major tools you use for customizing these types of systems, e.g. Yocto and Buildroot, simply don't run on Windows or they are a major pain to get working. I've found that, certainly for the ARM ecosystem, Linux can handle any embedded development project you throw at it. From a bare metal MCU to a full fledged Linux system running a GUI. A lot of the tools are free but there are still many high end commercial options out there if you need them (e.g. I use a Lauterbach debugger for some of the embedded work I do).I suspect that as Linux gains more ground in the embedded space more developers will switch to it on their development machines as well. It just makes life a lot easier in that context.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 07:52:17 pm
content: HP network printer you only need CUPS, and install the printer as a HP4MV, 5l or 6SI, as a PCL5 network or Postscript printer. The CUPS network printers are pretty good with HPGL or PS output, and the nice thing is they will query the printer and use it's advertised capabilities.I used my old laptop at work as a simple browser, print station and general use computer and media player, and it worked with every HP network printer there, even the new ones ( which I made sure to install at the same IP as well, so there was less hassle with printing from other machines, just changed the name in Windows Server and left the driver the same for the XP machines, and used the Win7 ( 32 or 64bit as needed) drivers for later machines, served from the server. Laptop simply used the CUPS driver for the original Laserjet 4MV, it just got some magic with the newer printers of double sided print and increased resolution and faster output, without any Linux system changes. It now prints to a HP LJ Pro 400 with no issues, even has the right margins and paper sizes.Canon printers though, were another issue, even if they are almost identical to the HP machines internally, they have an entirely different way to communicate. You think HP has it bad with that 700M universal driver, Canon has a 700M driver for __EACH__ __BLEEDING__ __VARIANT__ of printer, although they all seem to be almost the same load of cruftware and a few slightly buggy at times drivers.My new baby laser at home, i just plugged it in to Mint17, it thought about it for 10 minutes and then just worked perfectly. No worries at all.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 15, 2016, 10:23:05 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 15, 2016, 01:46:59 amThats only one factor though. Windows also has a very large security hole thinly disguised as a web browser which makes exploiting easy, Linux your web browesr isn't integrated into the window system or integrated into the kernel so you have a layered security approach. With windows is you can put up a simple exploit on a web ad and p0wn the browser you get access all the way in deep to the kernel.There are other factors as well but that it the worst.

author: Skimask
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2016, 03:56:24 am
content: Quote from: Srbel on September 14, 2016, 05:51:07 amWhat's your point?I've been using Windows since Windows 1.0Haven't been hit by anything malicious yet.But I'm slowly switching over to Linux anyways thru attrition.

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2016, 07:32:36 am
content: Exactly thst. Using Linux for 20 years. Using windows for 24 years. Never infected.Always the user's fault if I see one that is. Give a monkey a gun and they will shoot themselves with it. Give them a toy gun (iPad) and they can't hurt themselves easily.

author: Srbel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2016, 10:28:43 am
content: You know when your computer is kind of slow, and you think it is because it is an old Windows instalation or old hardware, and your AV software says that you are not infected? You're infected.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2016, 12:18:06 pm
content: Quote from: setq on September 16, 2016, 07:32:36 amNot always the users fault. I was infected by malware in Windows XP twice. Both times was a simple typo in the (IE) address bar. Something as innocent as typingwww.gogle.comwould lead me to a domain squatter that pushed crap to my box. Granted this was before we had programs like ad-aware or even firefox. At the time netscape had been AOL'ed so we were pretty much stuck with IE.So I suppose you could day my fault for typing gogle instead of google but I could easily say that a web browser shouldn't be that tightly integrated into he OS that I get infected with malware or at least me running as a non-admin user should have prevented it or at least the antivirus program I was running should have prevented it.More recently I would have to clean up my parents pc every month or two all the while explaining how internet explorer was less secure than alternatives like firefox or chrome but they kept using IE. Finally I convinced them to try firefox and the once a month clean up has extended to 6-9 months. So same user habits but a more secure browser made a big difference. This tells me the fauly is not entirely with the user.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 16, 2016, 01:11:35 pm
content: Quote from: Srbel on September 16, 2016, 10:28:43 amNope.

author: Carl_Smith
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 01:34:23 am
content: Quote from: edy on September 12, 2016, 05:09:46 amIs there anything you can do to put the window controls back on the right where they belong?

author: Kuro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 06:10:19 pm
content: I've been planning to switch to Linux for several months now, and right now am looking at some unexpected free time. Reason of switch: MS trying to hyjack my PC (aka, trying for a year to force me to switch to W10).But while I know a lot about Windows, I know little about Linux, there's a lot to learn and what made me nervous is my lack of knowledge how Linux security is handled. Looking at forums about Linux where statements like "no need for a virus scanner, Linux has no virusses" abound, does not make me feel very at easy. I also read somewhere that Ubuntu's firewall is not activated by default, the user has to do this himself (which most regular computer users won't do).Nor do Torvald's statements that security holes are not that high on his priority list very reassuring indeed.So, how would you suggest handling some proactive security policy on Linux? Is the Clam antivirus worth anything? Things like AppArmor on OpenSuse? And, my main worry, though with a proper backup system it is relatively easily handled - how to defend against malware that can run with user rights, like ransomware?With the mix of people here, I'm curious if I can get more level headed proposals hereApart from whether you can find a way to get things done one the new OS, I think currently this is a main issue for people who want to run Linux on the desktop.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 06:30:23 pm
content: Quote from: Kuro on September 17, 2016, 06:10:19 pmSearch for a Linux User Group in your area. Ask for an experienced Linux Admin who can teach you for one day everything you need, and pay him for this! Do the installation and the first steps (hardening/securing the system) together. Get a basic backup running.Ask questions and and write down the answers. Learn the next months with open source books about the distribution you use. (Ubuntu)Best regardshammy

author: Kuro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 07:42:52 pm
content: Thanks Hammy, that's good advice! Linux isn't very popular here, but there have to be some aroundWhat do you think of the certification programs for Linux admins, from Suse and Red Hat for example? Are they worth the rather high cost? For professional application, not for home desktop of course.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:12:23 pm
content: Hi Kurothere are someBelgian Linux organisations, maybe this is a good start.I'm using Linux since 20 years, beside OSX and Solaris. Linux and Solaris was my day job. I completed the solaris certified sysadm (scsa) and the solaris security system admin (scsa) courses for Solaris 9 and 10 and got such a nice golden certificate, shaped like a credit card, from SUN.Some of my collegues had the LPI 1 and 2 exam. I always worked in big companies with thousands of servers. Some of the stuff I tell you here may not apply to smaller companies.These exams are a good way to get your foot in the door and to pass the HR for a job interview. Somethimes these tests also fill some blind spots and they round up your knowledge.If the company pays it, get them all. If you pay it on your own, just do it in peparation for the next job you want to get.My Solaris certificates only last for four years, until I had have to renew them.The Linux LPI certificates don't expire AFAIK.But these are not cheap: LPI level 1 roundabout 1900.-€ and LPI level 2 roundabout 2100.-€.Work experience is the most important factor. With less than 5 year experience the want to see both exams. With work experience they don't care anymore about this, if your previous work of field is similar to the stuff they run.On the other side I worked the last years in an goverment like organisation and they wanted certificates and exams for all type of stuff.So it depends where you want to get a job. It depends.If a linux system (or any other unix system) is up-to-date with the patches and no one with bad intentions get local access to such a system, the security is good enought for most of the critical company systems. For a private person it is more than good enough.If you run you system behind your own cable-router, in your home network, this router already brings a firewall. This is protecting you and your network against the most stuff out there.Security is only a problem if you use an old browser, unencrypted news sites with ads, and other shady websites. Stuff like torrents from obscure sources and any other stuff common sense tells you. (crackz and warez from any other site withleetspeak)Use a vitual machine for stuff like this, run a read-only instance with Knoppix in it. (Ask the guy you hire for this!)Bottom line: Get someone with real experience in linux, not a wannabe, and pay him some money. This way he is taking this "job" serious and get you on track in a professional manner. This should be the best start for you.To establish some good security arrangements in you private enviroment it is necessary to see the whole pricture. What type of devices do you run, do you run a NAS, do you run a full server, how many workstation do you want, what do you want to do with these workstation. Are you alone or is your family also using these wokstations? What type of internet connection do you use? Do you want to run your own webserver/mailserver?Write it down and show this the guy who is hired to help you, if possible.It should only need a day to install a workstation for you with all basic software you need and briefly explain every step to you.With such a well prepared system you don't burn your fingers and you start your jouney.Cheershammy

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:17:32 pm
content: Quote from: Kuro on September 17, 2016, 06:10:19 pmHe is probably talking about local root exploits, these have historically been a dime a dozen. They shouldn't be, but they are ... what's the point in worrying about it when you know they will still be there in abundance any way?Say thank you to the software industries enthusiastic support for C and insistence that good programmers can handle programming without runtime bounds checking. Illusion of control is such an alluring self deception.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:37:00 pm
content: Quotegiven that linux has a good share of the servers market, and many servers are hacked, wouldn't be natural to expect many of the hacked servers run linux?

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:38:14 pm
content: Quote from: madires on September 06, 2016, 02:21:10 pmTo be picky Linux is just the kernel which is only a tiny part of the operating system. What post people are referring to when they speak of Linux is really GNU/Linux.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:40:04 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on September 17, 2016, 09:38:14 pm

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:45:34 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 17, 2016, 09:37:00 pmmany servers, even in a professional enviroment, are not maintained properly. Somethimes you don't get a downtime to patch the system, somethimes the company don't pay the maintenace fees any more, or a satelite server (RHN) is to costly and it is impossible to maintain the server in this paticular security zone properly.If you see a linux server with an high uptime ... this only tells you this server hadn't got the important patches. A high uptime is nothing you should be proud of.However, a off-the-shelf linux desktop with up-to-date patchlevel ist quite secure. You never get 100% security.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:49:59 pm
content: QuoteIs it due to the (relative) difficulty is maintaining a linux server properly or is it due to operator incompetency?would be interesting to see how a properly maintain windows box vs. a properly maintained linux box may fare against a varieties of common attacks.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 09:52:34 pm
content: Quote from: hammy on September 17, 2016, 09:45:34 pmAnd if there are no remote or local holes which actually need patching?Blindly applying every update is nothing you should be proud of.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 10:04:27 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 17, 2016, 09:49:59 pmIMHO- 20% of the security problems are based on the lack of administrators knowledge- 10% due to cross-system relationships (the firewall admin dont know what the sysadmin is doing, and vice versa)- 70% is applying the patches to late or neverIMHO the difficulty to maintain a server in a large organisation is the swollen bureaucracy.Quote from: dannyf on September 17, 2016, 09:49:59 pmThere was once, years ago, a comparison between a Windows server running IIS and a Linux server running Apache. Both Admins (real professionals in their field!) got serveral hours time to secure the system after installation. Afterwards a penetration test was started and they got a quite good result about the security of both systems.I hadn't seen such tests in the last years anymore. The discussion about this is over.The afterall security of servers is not the important thing for companies nowadays. It is the money. If you can run a server without license fees and maintenance costs the management is exited. For Windows you have to pay. "OpenSource" means "less costs" and not "a better world" for the management.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 10:13:21 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on September 17, 2016, 09:52:34 pmIf you are able to analyze a server in this way, to proof there is no security hole, and you don't risk your job with this statement ... sure, do it your way.In a professional enviroment you never apply patches blindly. Every patch (or patchset) should be tested in your DEV and pre-production environment first. After that, after QS is happy, you apply it to your production environment. Not doing it this way is a huge risk.However, somethimes the management want you to apply the patch directly in production.Its an imperfect world.

author: Monkeh
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 10:15:34 pm
content: Quote from: hammy on September 17, 2016, 10:13:21 pmWhen you're talking about more or less the only reason to reboot a Linux box and lose uptime, that is, the kernel.. this is relatively easy.Oh noes, a remote DoS vulnerabi- oh, wait, I don't even have that code built in this kernel because I have no application for it. Oh well, I'd best update anyway!

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 10:23:27 pm
content: QuoteThat would suggest the whole thing rests on human incompetency. and hardware / software doesn't matter.Maybe the most secure platform is a DOS environment,

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 10:31:39 pm
content: Quote from: Monkeh on September 17, 2016, 10:15:34 pmSometimes, for some big database servers, running on solaris in a security zone I hadn't applied all patches. If you don't run a NFS server you don't need the patches for the NFS daemon. To get maintenace downtime for such beasts is not easy.But in such a case you are administrating these servers directly. The admin knows these servers in a detailed level.In other enviroments, running tousands of linux servers, you don't connect to individual servers anymore. They are deployed automatically and they are manged by profiles and scripts. (RHN, FAI, Puppet, Jumpstart, Jet, AutoYast, Alice, Cfengine)The tests are performed with Jenkins and other tools.I never worked in a small environment, running less than 500 servers. The biggest was running 3000 bare metal servers with a lot more virtual servers on top. (ESXi, Zones, Jails)My work experience to handle such an amount of servers differs from other admins. My stategies how to handle patches and how to ensure security is adapted to large environments. You don't pay attention to an individual server anymore! It's not worth the effort.If you don't know what caused a problem you connect to the server and you drill down the problem, but you don't fix it on this server. You incorporate the update/patch/script/workaround into the deployment system and you hit the button.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 10:37:11 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on September 17, 2016, 10:23:27 pmYes, maybe. You can never win the race. There is always -at least- one guy smarter than you. Or youngerandfasterandsmarter than you. And whatever you do, this guy can break your systemYou cannot prevent 100% that your system can be hacked. Or there is no zero-day security hole. It is impossible. You have to prepare for this case and you need a proper backup and disaster recovery.But in a private enviroment, running your private linux workstation at home, it is way easier to be on the safe side. You're not offering services and your system is not exposed to the internet. This helps a lot.

author: retiredcaps
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 11:29:21 pm
content: Quote from: Kuro on September 17, 2016, 06:10:19 pmAnyone who says OS xyz can't get a virus is delusional.QuoteLubuntu does not have the ufw enabled by default. I know because I have probably installed Lubuntu over 100 times at home and the first thing I do issudo ufw enableQuoteI don't use any AV on Lubuntu. AppArmor is automatically enabled on Lubuntu. Clam AV, like any AV, usually relies finding known virus signatures. I have helped many friends and family with Windows virus/malware problems even though they have some sort of AV installed.In addition, some of the AV products are just terrible. Travis Ormandy over at Google's Project Zero in basically one week dismantled every major AV Windows product and discovered major flaws, bugs, holes that have existed for years.If you keep Linux updated through daily patch checks (which is/can be automated) and use an up to date browser with some ad blocking, you should be generally safe.All my important stuff resides on the main computer in which I do very little. My main browsing, checking out new sites, etc is done on another test computer.

author: retiredcaps
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 17, 2016, 11:52:23 pm
content: Quote from: Kuro on September 17, 2016, 06:10:19 pmBTW, the best way to learn and pick a distro that meets your requirements is to have a separate machine and try the top 10 over atwww.distrowatch.comThe top 10 will give you a representation of what to expect. After, you can choose a distro suited to your needs and computer. A Core2Duo with a least 1GB DRAM should give you good experiences.If you have lots of extra time, try distros 1-30.

author: hammy
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 12:10:19 am
content: Quote from: retiredcaps on September 17, 2016, 11:52:23 pmA good idea. It depends how much time you want to spent to fiddle with the system.To avoid frustration a distro like Ubuntu/OpenSuSE/Debian/RedHat would be IMHO the best. There are a lot people out there with knowledge about these. Maybe a beginner should avoid to start with Slackware/Arch/Gentoo.Or a RasPI with Raspian is a good start. If you want to start small.Cheershammy

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 02:43:31 am
content: Quote from: hammy on September 18, 2016, 12:10:19 amMaybe I'm odd or maybe because I started old school with a Commodore 64 then an Amiga and then Dos 5 so I found Slackware the easiest, maybe because using fdisk and formatting and installing was second nature to me but I just couldn't get used to all the 'easy' distro's that wanted to do everything for me.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 04:20:55 am
content: openSUSE/SUSE is geared towards admins and i find it much better. During installation process you have chance to configure the firewall in GUI and whether or not you want to enable SSH.In the old days the difference between linux desktop and server was that the kernels was different and so did the packages they came with. linux desktop would come with the GUI and programs but have all the ports and services disabled. Linux server would have packages like apache and the services all enabled (like telnet, ftp, ssh, apache, etc) but had no GUI, only command line. For a server install the admin would have to configure the entire system which is tedious however admins would develop scripts to configure many systems the way they want easily. Nowadays the kernels are the same and for ubuntu the only difference between server and desktop is just one is barebones and the other has the GUI and all the software.OpenSUSE hasnt failed me yet like ubuntu has.Arrogance is something you will find with a linux user/developer. Used to be that linux focused on running on as much hardware as possible. This means if you wanted to use fake raid or some weird controller linux will run it. Now ubuntu refuses to fix mdadm boot loop when you install ubuntu on fakeraid. Other distributions have either included fixes or workarounds for fresh install. Try install ubuntu on fake raid and no workaround will work unless you already had it installed previously. One of the reasons why linux was used a lot in the engineering field was that it could run on the weird hardware they would develop on and use.Windows does cost money but despite the vulnerability many use it for 2 simple reasons. 1) licensing such as for education or the new licensing that allows windows server to be had for much cheaper now. 2) lazyness. Even so a windows system can be just as secure as a linux system. Its all a matter of how you configure it and if you have extra networking devices to help. If anyone has used iptables or even configure windows firewall im very sure they would understand what i mean. In other words if you plan to have your own server regardless of OS, its how you configure it that helps to keep it secure and avoiding vulnerable software(which is an issue for windows)Linux however can partition things much better than windows with more file system support. you could have every folder in '/' be a mount from another drive or partition. On windows you cant have program files, windows, system32 and other folders all mounted on different partitions. The distributed partitioning allows for more control and performance.With windows, microsoft sponsored backdoors and spyware are a problem. On linux this is less likely. Essentially both operating systems have similar problems but its how the users educate themselves, configure and use the OS that makes it better which on linux is made more apparent. Its the same with configurable routers, if you gave someone who only knows how to configure consumer/vpn routers they will not configure the router properly leaving it open to security flaws.if you wish to try linux i suggest avoiding ubuntu. Novell and red hat both have their linux distros which i would suggest for beginners and advanced users.

author: Kuro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 09:07:07 am
content: They say BSD is more secure than Linux. Any truth in that? There aren't very many distro's for BSD, and even only one for desktop (TrueOs, renamed from PC-BSD recently. Not sure wat that means, all other OS are fake OS)BTW Hammy, found that page of LUGs too, the local ones are all dead (I had hopes for Lumumba since it was at the local university, but dead too). Guess I'll head over the border. One good thing about living in a small country: the border's always closeThere's a big tech uni in Aachen, Germany, I'm sure there will be some Linux users there!

author: Kuro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 09:15:26 am
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 18, 2016, 04:20:55 amI've been 'using' a VM with Opensuse for years, just to do my bank business. I don't use it for anything else and keep it updated. Runs KDE, so very easy for a Windows guy like me. I kinda like the recent change - they decided to use most of the professional server version (Suse, without Open) even if this means it's not really cutting edge. Stability comes first. And then they add recent packages like the most recent version of LibreOffice. If you want cutting edge, there's a rolling release version Tumbleweed.There, that's my magick word for an OS: stability!Keep your cutting edge and new gizmo's, I'll take tried and tested any day.

author: Karel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 09:57:14 am
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 18, 2016, 04:20:55 amWrong. As long as windows is the major desktop os and Linux desktop marketshare is around 2~3%,(almost) all malware aimed at desktops, are dangerous only for windows users.And no, a virusscanner is NOT a solution! Even the best scanners can't catch more than 90% of malware going around in the wild.So, as long as Linux has a marginal marketshare on the desktop, it's much more secure than a correctly configuredand updated windows desktop with an updated virusscanner.I guess we all agree that "the year of Linux on the desktop" is still far away, if ever, so, Linux is your best bet for security.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 11:25:33 am
content: QuoteThat's just 100% wrong: I thin we established earlier in this thread that security is 100% human.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 12:28:52 pm
content: QUESTION:I have an ASUS M51a laptop (Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 @2.26 GHz, 2GB RAM). It's a 32-bit system. I'm making some space on it next to my Windows 7 to dual-boot Ubuntu. I need a lot of the graphics, video and audio apps so it would be nice to have them pre-installed.But I know my machine spec-wise is not the greatest.So the questions is..... Do I install Ubuntu Studio and then add on LXDE (install the Lubuntu libraries) to allow me to boot into a lighter session when I'm not trying to use the graphics apps (which will depend on the Gnome or KDE desktops).Or.... do I install Lubuntu and then add the Graphics/Audio/Video apps along with their dependencies like Gnome, KDE and so on?

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 01:31:39 pm
content: Use a boot DVD and try them out without installing. That way you get a good feel if it will all work, and have lost nothing in trying other than making a boot disk in any case. Almost every Linux will have a live DVD that runs, and includes an installer in it.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 02:22:00 pm
content: Quote from: SeanB on September 18, 2016, 01:31:39 pmGood point. I do have live DVD's and also live USB's and I believe I should be able to configure the BIOS to boot from it. I can give both a try and see how sluggish Gnome is on my machine. Either way if I install Ubuntu Studio I will probably find a way to get LXDE in there as an option on login in case I want to just use the machine for quick non-graphics related tasks.Quote from: wilfred on September 18, 2016, 01:39:39 pmInteresting.... I never bothered to check. The machine came with Vista BIZ and then gave me an option to upgrade free to Win 7, both 32-bit. I only have 2 GB ram so unless I upgraded to 4 GB, the 32-bit Windows was enough. Why did ASUS not put in 64-bit windows to begin with if the CPU supported it?Seems like a stupid thing on the part of ASUS to give you a system that allows expansion of RAM beyond the 32-bit Windows limit, and a CPU capable of 64-bit... yet put a 32-bit version of Windows on there. Could it have been due to driver issues at the time? Or lack of fore-sight? Or what? Or did 64-bit Windows not exist yet when I bought the machine? And when I upgraded, it only let me go to 32-bit Win 7, I could not upgrade to 64-bit Win (maybe because that would have required a complete fresh install)?Anyways.... if you think it possible, I'll try booting from a 64-bit Ubuntu Studio USB I have. I never bothered, and I even downloaded the 32-bit version and burned it to DVD because I never suspected it would work. Would there be any issues having it installed beside a Win 7 32-bit system? I guess the 2 systems have nothing to do with each other.... But if I want to access files on my Windows partition from the Ubuntu OS to view, edit, etc... I guess that has nothing to do with whether one system is 32-bit and the other is 64-bit, correct?

author: Kalvin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 02:42:11 pm
content: Pls keep in mind that the booting and running from the physical Live DVD will bequiteterribly slow compared to running from the hard disk. Yes, booting and running from the physical DVD media will give you very disappointing impression about the speed and performance. But you can evaluate the look & feel about the Linux distro. There may not be any proprietary drivers included either.One way on performing the initial evaluation would be to use a Virtualbox or similar virtualization software, mount the Live DVD ISO-image as a boot device and run the preliminary evaluation on the virtual machine. In that way you don't have to burn the physical DVD and the performance will be a bit better. After you have sorted out 2 - 3 most promising candidates, just burn the ISO-image to DVD, boot from the DVD and perform a trial installation and see how your system is performing and how well the hardware is supported.Personally I do like Linux Mint (with MATE desktop) quite a lot and I haven't had any major problems with it - it just works. Should I have run into any problems (like installing Canon scanners and printers, enabling printing over the Wifi, updating the BIOS on my laptop in order to get the USB 3 working properly etc.), the google has provided quick solutions. There are probably some other distros that suit better for your needs, so as others have already suggested, take a look at thehttps://distrowatch.com/.Virtualbox and other similar virtualization tools are quite handy as you can test different distros without committing to actual installation until you know that you are happy with the distro. Virtualization and Linux Containershttp://www.ubuntu.com/cloud/lxdare also very useful in order to separate and isolate your development environment from your desktop environment. These systems allows also taking a snapshot of the virtual system's state before you try something that might break the system or impacts its stability. If you are not happy with the results, just roll back to the snapshot in a few seconds and try again.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 02:55:27 pm
content: Vista so likely only was capable of handling a 32bit OS, probably because some of the hardware is 32 bit only. Then the upgrade was limited to 32 bit because the original was 32 bit, and they did not want support calls for a borked 64 bit upgrade. Nuke and pave and it likely is full 64 bit, but only way to tell is try the 64 bit and see if it works.2G ram because the RAM was the easiest way to drop price, and with a image install of Windows there is no need to have the extra RAM that the installer would need during installation, you were just doing a PXE boot or a Ghosted image during manufacture, with a COA and a small write of the serial number to the completed drive after the bulk copy.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 03:48:21 pm
content: Quote from: SeanB on September 18, 2016, 02:55:27 pmOk, so I'm going to try running the 64-bit Ubuntu Studio distro first off USB or DVD to see if it even loads. If it seems to be running fine (but expectedly slow) and recognizing my hardware, I'll install it. If any issues with speed then, I can just nuke the Linux partitions again install another distro.As far as ASUS goes, I guess they just decided to stick with what worked even though the processor was able to handle 64-bit? Maybe they didn't have all the drivers available for 64-bit system and they couldn't use the 32-bit drivers.... That's probably the easiest answer. So until the 64-bit drivers caught up, or the hardware was updated which had drivers for both, they stuck with 32-bit to make it work.... and since they spec'd most of their systems with either 2 GB or 3 GB out of the box, nobody every noticed.... even though it was advertised as being expandable to 4 GB.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 04:20:53 pm
content: Quote from: Kuro on September 17, 2016, 06:10:19 pmVirtualization, Gresecurity, seccomp and apparmor are the first line of defense. Apparmor being the weakest, but under ubuntu you can enable it for a couple of utilities and firefox, so why not (there's a couple of use cases where it might interfere with firefox functionality, which is why it's not enabled by default, but it's not very likely as long as you don't use Flash). Google has used seccomp in strengthening their sandbox for Chrome and Chromium, it should be your primary browser.These are the easy steps, for higher complexity you can separate what you use your computer for (say work, normal browsing, banking and porn browsing) into multiple virtualized or semi-virtualized (docker, LXC, etc) OS instances.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 07:56:27 pm
content: booting from usb also is slow. Some usb drives work at a few MB/s while some will work faster but is still slower than a typical hard drive. SSDs may be fast but flash drives only have a single/dual flash storage chip whereas SSDs have many flash chips.Putting the installer/live on fast usb drive is very helpful whether its for linux or just windows rescue.I've been using windows for years and never got any malware. The only time i got malware was when i let someone else use my pc and it was through subtitles for videos. Otherwise never have i gotten malware or hacked on windows.Security really depends on the user, not the OS. Linux only makes it more apparent on the learning and configuration process. Sure windows will be more vulnerable than linux because of the services that always run and come preinstalled that arent important, but knowing that you can disable them to keep your windows safe.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 08:01:15 pm
content: Microsoft's business model prevents them from offering single computer virtualization in the same way Linux can.

author: rdl
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 11:02:26 pm
content: Interesting write up:http://itvision.altervista.org/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 11:21:21 pm
content: QuoteFair. but too technical.From the consumer's perspective, Linux is a huge success and a non-factor at the same time. There are gazillion copies of Android running on phones and tablets and that's the best demonstration that linux ***can*** work on desktop - it has the potential.The various linux distributions are fairly rudimentary, unpolished and not ready for their prime time.I think the failure of linux on desktop is very difficult to cure, as it is its very strength: open source means gazillion forks of minor variations from each other. No consumer is going to spend much time trying to figure out which is best for him/her. too many choices are bad.For me, it is the lack of software, both in the form of drivers and software I need to use. This is a chicken-and-egg problem: no one wants to develop software for a system that no one uses; and if there is no software on a system, no one uses that system.The key here is that there is no compelling reason for anyone to use linux. Windows on the desktop suits 99.99% of the users just fine.Unless Linux can demonstrate its value proposition, that situation isn't going to change any time soon.The caveat, however, is google: Google certainly has the means to push out a desktop version of linux, as shown in my original post, as a way to kill Microsoft.Would google do that? I don't think so. A microsoft on its current track is far more valuable to google, alive than dead.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 18, 2016, 11:48:33 pm
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 18, 2016, 04:20:55 amMuch wrong in this.I'm not going to comment on all the points here just the worst,Arrogance is just as bad on the MS side, I have a number of 'won't fix' case numbers from Microsoft, I'd post them as evidence but they are property of my employer and not me.You cannot make windows as secure as linux. You could spend a lot of time securing windows to make it as secure as the average default linux distro but if you spent an equal time securing Linux you would still end up way ahead of windows.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 12:53:55 am
content: Quote from: eugenenine on September 18, 2016, 11:48:33 pmYou forgot about android and that OSX is unix based but is very very different now. Are you saying that the datacenters using windows server are very very vulnerable now? The very important choice for an OS now is the requirements so other than staff/skill to a particular OS theres also the hardware and software to consider in the choice. Different OS have their own advantages and disadvantages. The way linux works is that some company needs something and adds to the OS, which in turn gets incorperated which is the idea of open source, everyone contributing to what is missing or what is needed. This is why linux can be free. With windows when someone makes a solution, it usually requires some form of payment but that solution will suit a lot of people. Not every time is open source or closed source a good thing. Its why i dont recommend ubuntu as too many broken problems.Android has malware and ransomware on it. Many smart tvs that run android have the hardware debug ports disabled so if they get hit by malware they are impossible to recover.

author: eugenenine
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 01:38:00 am
content: What I'm saying is you can take a windows server and a linux server and spend the same time securing both and the linux server will still be ahead. The only way to make a windows server as secure as a linux server would be to spend extra time securing the windows server and intentionally spending time to make the linux server less secure.True android does run on top of a linux kernel but Android itsself is within a jvm on top of it, much like if you ran windows inside of virtualbox or vmware. Any android vulnerabilities are within the android guest not the linux host itsself.

author: System Error Message
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 03:43:21 am
content: Quote from: eugenenine on September 19, 2016, 01:38:00 amThats exactly how windows server is used in datacenters, inside virtualisation. Truth is whether you use windows server or linux server the difference in security really comes down to how you set it up. The wise thing to do is not to use IIS or any IE related components and to strip down any unrequired windows component (essentially you have to uninstall windows components, configure,install and optimise), which is what i do with every windows i install. The problem is most people just wouldnt take the effort to learn linux. When you deploy linux the base/default config is vulnerable so your typical windows/mac user wouldnt know and leave it like that. Both OS are vulnerable when deployed but linux users tend to be more educated and valuable than windows admins.

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 07:38:19 am
content: Windows Server vs Linux security picture is about the same. I run a pile of both.What is important is value. Automation increases value. Friction decreases it. Ergo, windows is a pile of shit in a server scenario.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 11:05:29 am
content: "You cannot make windows as secure as linux"Sounds like all those people running data centers are too ignorant,I wonder if looking at the facts may change your view.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 01:02:38 pm
content: There's a huge difference between running Windows servers for an Intranet or for public services. I wouldn't do the latter. It's not just about security, it's also about IP stacks, performance and ease of operation. No sane network engineer would run a Windows server for public Internet services (unless forced by management).

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 01:20:29 pm
content: Unfortunately for the network engineers, the architects (aka me) told the developers to use C# and Visual Studio to build the product because they're a lot more expensive than the infrastructure is and the time to market and turnaround is faster with really good tools. And this pays the bills.I'm not sure what network engineers are doing above layer 5.

author: Karel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 02:59:20 pm
content: Quote from: System Error Message on September 18, 2016, 07:56:27 pmI know lot's of people who use windows and got malware. Among them also engineers.Quote from: System Error Message on September 18, 2016, 07:56:27 pmNope, it depends on the os AND the user.The fact that Linux desktop isn't a target for (most) malware writers is a huge advantage that shouldn't be underestimated.People without a clue for security can use a Linux pc for a long time without a virusscanner without getting in trouble.With windows, this is impossible (except maybe without an internet connection...).

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 03:49:53 pm
content: Quote from: setq on September 19, 2016, 01:20:29 pmC# has just become java redux, a language few people really like coasting along on inertia.Go is going to eat everyone's lunch ... well that and server side javascript, the most insane concept since PHP. Bloody webdevs.

author: Karel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 05:09:29 pm
content: Quote from: Marco on September 19, 2016, 03:49:53 pmAhum...http://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 05:28:29 pm
content: Quote from: Marco on September 19, 2016, 03:49:53 pmC# is nothing like Java. That's quite a laughable point.Plus there's no way we could deliver our stuff on top of golang. It's just immature and quite frankly stupid in a few places.

author: Kuro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 05:49:42 pm
content: My (current and possibly ex-) boss is a MS junkie and loves C#. All else is junk and Linux is commie stuff. You know the type. But from what I've seen, C# is tightly linked with .Net, right?So what do you architects advise Linux developers to use?

author: Karel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 06:01:15 pm
content: Quote from: Kuro on September 19, 2016, 05:49:42 pmhttps://www.qt.io/

author: Kuro
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 06:05:25 pm
content: QT is a framework, also basis of KDE if I recall. So C++ ? Or can you use Java with QT? Or Python,...?

author: setq
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 19, 2016, 06:13:45 pm
content: Quote from: Kuro on September 19, 2016, 05:49:42 pmC# is a language. .Net is a runtime (standard library and VM). Much like Java+JVM they are platform independent i.e. work on Linux too. Hell even visual studio code works fine on Linux and SQL server is on its way over. The OS matters that little now, you MUST start with a software platform choice if you're going to build a product. Entry and exit cost is a the same as Java I.e. $0.If you want to build a large product or put your business at least risk, use a Java or C# based platform. I'd edge towards C# as the development experience and language is far ahead of anything out there. You can jump between procedural, OO and functional code as and when you need it and decide how dynamic bits if your application need to be. There are mature build, packaging, deployment, review and analysis tools.The big win for .Net/C# is you can make it talk to anything with your eyes shut and no friction from loosely typed contracts (JSON/HTTP) through strict XML/XSD.Go falls over at the first hurdle on all of these points. Python is hard to build a big project with.The things I build have 50 people on them and millions of lines of code and you just can't evolve a project of that scale with anything else for as little cost.Ergo, C#.Edit: also screw C++/Qt unless you're building CAD software or stuff with strict realtime UI requirements at. Build the UI in a browser and run a process in the background that handles the API. Then it's platform portable instantly.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 21, 2016, 09:51:58 pm
content: I booted and currently writing this post from Ubuntu Studio on my DVD drive (Live DVD). It is the 64-bit version and yes it seems to running quite well. It took forever to boot from DVD (and my drive is also slow and a bit fidgety anyways), but once running the actual desktop environment is quite fast.It is using Xfce, not Gnome. I'm not sure why. I was expecting it to look like my wife's computer where I installed the latest Ubuntu Desktop, which is using Unity Desktop Environment.https://unity.ubuntu.com/. Looks like Ubuntu Studio 16.04.1 LTS uses Xfce? Anyone know? Regardless, it is definitely working nicely and so I'm preparing my computer and clearing it up to get it up and running as a dual-boot system.[EDIT:]PS - I closed the laptop and when I opened it, it resumed and asked for a login on the Live DVD. The username is "ubuntu-studio" and blank password. I guess other versions are default to "ubuntu", which was coming up on Google search. So for future reference, default LiveDVD username is "ubuntu-studio" with no password. I hooked it up to WiFi at home, no issues. It appears to me to be very solid even on this old laptop![EDIT 2:]I'm almost done preparing my machine to install Ubuntu Studio on the HDD. I've had to do a pile of consolidating of files, backing up, removing programs I don't use... all to clear up enough space on the HDD to make a proper sized partition. Basically, a bunch of house-keeping and maintenance that was long overdue! I can't wait to get it going and try using it as my "main" desktop.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 03:35:29 am
content: It's been almost a week..... I'm actually surviving on Ubuntu Studio....I have not booted into Windows for what feels like forever... and surprisingly have been able to do most of my tasks in Ubuntu Studio with little to no difference. I am shocked at how close LibreOffice is to my old Office XP which I was using anyways. So I'm just mounting my Windows partition and working on the exact same files, documents, etc... as I was before except just using the Ubuntu software counter-parts instead.I've been able to do my online banking, access my Word docs, copy the banking info over to my Excel spreadsheets, view movies and photos, save/view PDF files, and so on. Last time I played around with some Linux distros I remember it wasn't so easy. It looks like at least some aspects are getting much more user-friendly. Also the Software center is a saviour... I remember the old way of trying to find packages, either rebuild them or compile, it was not for the novice.Other aspects are not so user-friendly. For example, to get the hibernation mode going I had to Google it... it wasn't set by default. There is a command you run to test it, and then you can create some kind of configuration file and copy/paste some config info to it:https://help.ubuntu.com/16.04/ubuntu-help/power-hibernate.html. Also, I installed MAME and needed to edit some kind of config files to get the ROM dir set.Anyways, I'm liking it so far.Not that I hate Windows, but I just want to make sure I have alternatives and know enough to not be lost.On another note....Does anyone know of a good electronic circuit simulator to install on Ubuntu? I tried to install qucs-spice but it's asking me for an Ubuntu One account which I already set up, but the Software Center doesn't recognize it (even though I can login online no problem). I also tried to get it directly using "sudo apt-get install qucs" or "sudo apt-get install qucs-spice" but that didn't work. I'm at a loss... I think that's the one that is probably going to be the most suitable for me. I just want to be able to draw some simple circuits and probe them to see how the voltage changes if I make some oscillators and such. I know I can do this on some online sites but I'd like to have software installed for analog and maybe some digital circuit simulation. Any help would be appreciated.[UPDATE:]I even tried throught the official pagehttp://qucs.sourceforge.net/install.htmlto type the following command-line like this:>sudo apt-add-repository ppa:qucs/qucs>sudo apt-get update>sudo apt-get install qucsBut I get error "E: Package 'qucs' has no installation candidate"..... Some progress... I used another repository... $ sudo add-apt-repository ppa:fransschreuder1/qucs (This one has it). But apparently Ubuntu dropped Qt3 support or something. So if it doesn't work I'll have to see if I can install Qt3 I guess on the newest Ubuntu?

author: Srbel
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 05:56:32 am
content: You can use LTSpice in Wine.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 11:52:27 am
content: I have been on Phoenix and remix for sometime now and really liked them. Very smooth experience and quite user friendly, much more polished than Linux for desktop uses.No work related software yet but if you are just doing web surfing, emailing, social media and general entertainment, they offer a great alternative.

author: amspire
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 28, 2016, 03:05:05 pm
content: Quote from: Srbel on September 28, 2016, 05:56:32 amSecond this. Most of the time, LTSpice gets the job done the quickest.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 29, 2016, 03:05:24 am
content: Quote from: amspire on September 28, 2016, 03:05:05 pmOk, I've installed it! Running and works pretty well (LTSpice IV).

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2016, 09:41:02 pm
content: Printer/Scanner combos:Ok! So my next concern was whether my multi-function nextwork printer/scanners would install ok. That was something that worried me.... but it turns out it was unfounded! The installation went fairly easily!I have 2 printers now at home...One is an HP OfficeJet Pro 8500A Plus (complete piece of S#!T)... but hey, it was dirt cheap, my wife wanted color at the time and inkjet was the easiest way to go. It also had everything in there.... fax option, multi-sheet page-feeder for scanning/fax/copy, etc. and built-in USB and card readers. It has options for dedicated Network connection, and USB straight to computer.The 2nd printer is a Brother DCP-L2520W, a dual laser printer/scanner with WiFi connection only (and USB straight to computer).So, I kept both printers, since I want to continue using the fax feature on the HP, and the multi-page feeder scanner. However, for most print-jobs I am going to use the Brother Laser. I set up my Brother on the WiFi, DHCP boot and local IP 192.168.002.030. The HP is plugged directly into the WiFi cable-modem and has been assigned the IP 192.168.002.031. So I am able to set up both printers in Ubuntu.The HP printer adds easily as it seems the drivers are all there by default. Works right out of the box, finds the network printer and uses HPLIP. However, with Brother it found the network printer but didn't have the drivers listed. So I had to download and install drivers from here:https://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2291505Here's the driver:http://support.brother.com/g/b/downloadlist.aspx?c=us&lang=en&prod=dcpl2520dw_us_eu&os=128I used these commands to install:gunzip linux-brprinter-installer-2.0.0-1.gzbash linux-brprinter-installer-2.0.0-1 dcpl2520wI answered Yes to a few questions and configured it to install via URI and selected IP and set the IP address manually. Now both printers are working, no problems at all. They can both print, and they can both be used to scan (I've tested it with Simple Scan or GScan2PDF).Honestly, I had more time wasted installing these printers in Windows... since both printers came with huge install packages on CD's containing all sorts of drivers, utility, bloatware, etc... And still I needed to fiddle with the settings anyways for my network. The Ubuntu process was way faster, more efficient and no crapware! AWESOME!Installed both printers on my UbuntuStudio laptop, my wife's laptop with "regular" Ubuntu (default), and on my kid's Lubuntu desktop. So we can print/scan from anywhere in the house.As Dave would say... Winner winner chicken dinner! +1 for Ubuntu handling my printers!