Comments from the darkness where only a den of iniquity exists or perhaps I'm in the White House.
How Linux and Linus Torvald Save Bill Gates' Butt through Apache
Published on June 26, 2005 By Chuck In Personal Computing
Listening to the various arguments almost on a daily basis involving Microsoft, Linux and various other operating systems causes a ringing in my ears that very few painkillers alleviate. I am fortunate enough to have many good friends involved in the computer industry at various levels and listen to them attentively picking up interesting bits of information for application applied in my own technical field. They are, however, torn primarily between Linux and Microsoft operating systems; and argue good naturely over the validity of each until a good high colonic is suggested by myself to end the perpetual argument. Of course, my high colonic suggestion is met with suspicion not only to my educational background and military service, but my supposed interest in high colonics which is vehemently denied.

Fairness and objectivity is something applied to many arguments in my fields of history and computers. A striving is needed to understand the relative merits of both Microsoft XP, in this case and SUSE Linux 9.2, shall we say since familiarity is known through usage of both. Personally, there are merits and disadvantages of both systems, but some commonalities that stand out. There is no doubt Microsoft has increasing become a memory hog in each new operating system unveiled while SUSE Linux can run very easily on meager memory. My desktop operates on 768MB of memory which is enough to sustain Windows XPSP2, but makes Linux 9.2 whiz like a champ through many applications.

Obviously, there are many more applications available for MS XP than Linux 9.2. Linux has seen more software companies swing over in the past few years as well an more American cities and various nations adopting this operating system. The hope is more well known software companies will develop applications for Linux since more US localities and nations are utilizing the system. IBM has been a strong booster for Linux for a few years now, but major computer manufacturers vacillate between offering Linux on systems in addition to Microsoft. Dell did for awhile, but charge more than it did for MS XP which made little sense other than they sold far less than the MS equipped ones. There seems to be a lot of commerce talk now indicating more computer companies will be offering Linux, but that remains to be seen.

What are the advantages of Linux? It takes less memory to function with as mentioned before and seems to be a safer system overall. There have been some security flaws in the system, but they have been quickly met and patches issued in a short period of time. In fact, various patches, etc., are always available whenever one goes up on Linux pending whatever one decides to apply. I also enjoy the security available on Linux utilizing both a uder id and password to enter, period. One can neter XP, encounter a security screeen and bypass by merely hitting cancel, but that is not the same on Linux. Secondly, any change to inner Linux is accessible only by password which again is very easy to access through XP. Another aspect is various GUI one can use in Linux ranging from Linux to GNome. There are wonderful selections depending on whatever your desires are. So we have operating on neglible memory, various GUIs, securty and a wonderful patching system readily acessibly to.

On the other hand, Linux is a system that takes adjusting to if you haven't operated it before. It demands a different mindset and the ability to absorb a Unix based system instead of the prevalent MS type most are familiar with. XP's installation idea, for example, is to simply download the desired program, click twice and the installation begins with limited intervention needed by the user. Linux 9.2, on the other hand, is slightly different and requires much more user attention to protocol than MS in addition to familiarity to a different type of file system. Make no doubt about it, you have to do your homework and a bit of studying pays off in the long run with a smooth running operating system. Best thing to do is visit a bookstore and buy a SUSE Linux book which outlines all the various operations, functions, etc., and familiarize yourself with it before actually doing some hands on operations. It pays off in the long run with greater understanding not only of Linux, but of the subtle differences with XP.

Linux has made substantial GUI changes with each new edition and has done well with SUSE Linux 9.2. My Linux Guru friends rant they are making it too much like MS while others state it is necessary to develop attraction by former MS owners. Regardless, the current GUI is easy to function with once you are familiar with the process just like other system. In fact, Linux has more to offer in terms of customization that XP and generally, what you don't find can be download by some genius who has written code for the very thing you desire. Linux research and development is among the people and not confined to Redmond as MS is. This vast pool of Linux developers adds so many unqie contributions that can only be reviewed by constantly going to the various Linux websites from around the world. Though Linux is free code, there are various companies like SUSE, Redhat and others who sell Linux for a small fee. The development, however, is till among the millions of adherents who develop everything from Tux to a small clock to tell time in Russian, for example. Its truly an amazing example in international cooperation at work on a wonderful project.

One thing continually tiring about XP are the numerous security updates not only for XP, but also the various components such as Office, Outlook, Internet Explorer and Outlook Express. There were eight two weeks ago, but the number this year alone is staggering in comparison to Linux which is confronted with very few in comparison. So one asks why the problem with Microsoft? My guess is two fold with the primary being Microsoft didn't accomplish a great deal of research and development before unveiling a product to the masses for sale. I sense their concept was to present it for sale and then meet each challenge as it arose instead of finding various major during during an expensive and time consumed r/d period. One can also call this profit motive before r/d expenditures whereas Linus research and development is constant involving millions of people worldwide on any given issue. Secondly, it also appears Bill Gates, himself, gain many enemies due to his management style, aggressiveness and monopolistic desires that, in turn, manifested itself in creation of a multitude of hackers who developed a sole mission to find as many flaws or security holes in MS products as possible. In all fairness, there are many reputable laboratories out there which also find flaws and report them to Microsoft and Redmond gives them credit accordingly when announcing the hole and subsequent game plan for it. Regardless, a combination of the two aforemention reasons seem to illustrate the continual need for security upadates, SPs and various other changes issued by MS on a regular basis to those operating Microsoft operating system and products.

That in itself is enough to make even the most faithful to MS wonder what in the heck is going on. Take this example to consider>Outlook Express has a tendency to lose all print in the preview pane at times and also in the email when clicked to read. A diligent search of MS revleas only to a reinstall a dll thrun the run command on an interim basis with no permanent solution to the dilemma. This has ocurred to several of clients' systems and I gave up after exhaustive research for a solution and recommended they use Mozilla Thuderbird instead. All clients agreed this was an excellent recommendation after an initial breaking in period and now will not use anything else. Accordingly, they have also switched over to Mozilla Firefox due to security consideration after difficulties Internet Explorer has experienced and my recommendations. Bottom line was security and no permanent MS solution available even after email contact with MS techreps.

I have found no major problems with Linux nor Mozilla; and those encountered have been quickly resolved through the massive system used by both to encounter and resolve these needs. Linux has a massive knowledge base on SUSE and questions can also be directed to a LIVE PERSON for resolvement who actually emails you back within a short period of time. I was amazed since no waiting time was involved as with MS and secondly, I didn't find myself talking with someone from either China or India, with respect, that difficulties were encountered understanding due to cultural differences. It appears MS has made great strides in this area, but they still lack on the customer service side.

What is the end result for me? I have one hard drive devoted to Linux 9.2 shortly to be upgraded to 9.3 which will be used to develop more knowledge and expertise with; a second harddrive with MS XPSP2 on for the same purpose; and a third on with Windows 2000SPR to remember the good old days. I could list all the difficulties had with XP, but will save that along with solutions for another rant. It will be interesting.

Gain as much knowledge as possible on all operating systems since both MS XP and Linux are being pushed hard throughout the world. They both have good selling points, but Linux is a bit ahead with a low cost tag and safer system; MS pushes on the availability of much software, but has to really work to convey safety. Personally, I would rather see Bill Gates arguing with Linus Torvald at some site in acity where it was all taped for future viewing. Not that Bill would ever do this, but it would be interesting to see and hear what both had to say about their respective systems. I placing my bet on Linus Torvald since Linux is stil surviving after years of being bad mouthed by Bill; particularly that served Gates onces stated was his greated nemeis-Apache. So good, MS installed them at Redmond and during one nasty bug night, these servers saved his butt, but Bill didn't like the annoucement being made Apache had achieved this. In fact, his ego needed massaging after that.

Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 29, 2005
Beneath the appealing, easy-to-use interface of Mac OS X is a rock-solid foundation that is engineered for stability, reliability, and performance. This foundation is a core operating system commonly known as Darwin. Darwin integrates a number of technologies, most importantly Mach 3.0, operating-system services based on 4.4BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution), high-performance networking facilities, and support for multiple integrated file systems.


So, OS X is built from Darwin, like I said.

So, if I take out the BSD stuff, we have:

Beneath the appealing, easy-to-use interface of Mac OS X is a rock-solid foundation that is engineered for stability, reliability, and performance. This foundation is a core operating system commonly known as Darwin.


on Jul 06, 2005
Just a few comments in the evnet that anyone is watching this article.

RE: The need for the many Windows security fixes. I am willing to bet that many of the security holes are found and exploited by users of Unix/Linux. They know that the majoirty of PC users use Windows OS and are not technically savoy. The same is not true of Unix/Linux users. There is a higher percentage of those users who are PC knowledgable, including those who are exploiting the holes in MS products. Why would a Linux user create a worm/virus that affects the OS that he/she uses and possibly helps create through the open source Linux community.

you can not fault Mircosoft for releasing an OS that is not 100% secure. If you wanted them to do more R&D and testing then expect to NEVER get another OS release. I am sure many of you would be fine with MS never releasing another OS, but that is not going to happen. How long has XP been out now? October will be 4 years. That means that the security patch you applied last week filled a hole that took over 3 1/2 years for either the MS team or someone that spends their free time attempting to exploit Windows. Should have MS waited this almsot 4 years before releasing XP because there were still ways to hack into the OS? Or in IE? No. Because these are HACKS, they are not simple oversights by MS, they are purposful attacks agaisnt the MS product. That is not the fault of MS. There is a small percentage of people that could ever find a 'loop hole' in any of of the MS prouducts. With all my computer knowledge I could never find and exploit any security holes in XP. I would imagine most reading this could not either. While it might seem we are paying to beta test XP, that is simply not the case. Be thankful that MS does update and support its product.

The people to blame are the hackers. Those who violate the company's rights and property.

I don't have anything to add to the MS vs Linux discussion... yet. I do plan to install a Linux build (Xandros) on one of my systems soon, both to broaden my knowledge and try new avenues to help be less dependant on MS.

If Linux gains more popularity and makes its way into mainstream computers I can assure you that the number of securtiy flaws and the need for patches with increase. This is true of Mozilla and Firefox as well. Once more people use them there will be more incentive for the evil-doers to hack the systems.

No computer connected to the internet will ever be 100% safe and secure. Increasing PC user awareness will help in limiting spyware/adware/malware/viruses.
on Jul 06, 2005
There is one area that I find to be a major progam in Linux programs; specifically OpenOffice.org or any other form of word processors found in the linux world. As an editor of histicial books, and history text books I have attempted to use several of the word processors that came with my copy of Suse Linux 9.2. Done of them can even hold a candle to the abilities built into MS Word (either in Windows, or Mac OSX. I even went as far as to download OpenOffice.org 2.0 Beta. Let me tell you now it still has a long way to go before it can even come close to matching the abilities of MS Word for editioning large documents, or files designed for text book layout.

As to Gimp I have it on both platforms (XP and 9.2), and as someone has already mentioned it doesn't even come close to the power that is found in Photoshop as well it smaller brother Photoshop Elements III.

As of yet I haven't seen a great desktop editing program either. Probably won't.

Here is another thing for Linux user to think about: If, and when Apple port OS X over to the X86 platform how long do you think it will take before someone figures out how to crack the OS so that it will work on just about any X86 system. Just some food for thought.

So there are a feel cities, and maybe some states who are switching to Linux, so what. It still has a large learning curve that some people just don't want to take the time to learn. And, so what if it based on BSD (or whatever); it really doesn't mean anything to the average computer user. Linux at this point has about as much chance of becoming the OS of choose as does Apple's OS X Tiger.

LOL Pam
2 Pages1 2