Up to now I have had all versions of windows from W98. In my opinion each successive version is worse that it's predecessor. Lots of bloat and unneeded "features" piled in at each re-cast. Windows should just provide the basic OS that makes a computer work. No need to bundle media players, office components etcetera in the thing. Often you can't dump what you don't like in windows as dependencies no longer work either..We are not the stupid pratts windows takes us for. Let us choose what software and programmes WE want and not what they think we need.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Windows in general
- Thread starter LMS6202
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Tried Ubuntu Yorkie. Very good it is too. Later on in the year I will buy a dedicated ubuntu laptop. A solid state one. the days of mechanicackle hard disks are numbered.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Well I have W7 now GE. Not much different from Vista IMO. If microsoft can't get it together after nearly 20 years then they never will.. A Linux machine for me next time but just possibly a MAC.
The only thing I can never fathom with Linux though is that it is more difficult to download stuff to the folder you want it in. Can't seem to get my head round where it all goes.
Last edited:
Indeed, but there is an N edition which is available in the EU which has Media Player and Messenger removed - a requirement of all the anti trust law suits.
To be fair though, Microsoft dont really bundle much software at all with Windows - but yes, the option to remove the items you dont want should be included - something which did exist in Windows 95 (and possible 98) but seemed to get lost XP onwards.
A Linux machine for me next time but just possibly a MAC.
Given that a Mac is nothing more than a Poser's PC then you may as well go with Linux unless there are specific apps which you need to run (Photoshop etc)
Do you mean applications or just general downloads? For someone unfamilar with Linux if installing apps then its best to use a package manager like RPM for example. As for general downloads they go into your /home directory by default.
poshbakerloo
Member
Windows 7 is much better than XP...and even better than 2000 and 98!
I do wonder what version of 7 other people use, because you can see what the differences in the versions are,
I will admit 7 and vista are alike, but they aren't the same, they work completely differently.
Vista/XP are obviously different versions
but the majority rules and a majority of people (myself included) like the fact windows media player and messenger comes with the system it makes it a lot easier to get started.
I will admit 7 and vista are alike, but they aren't the same, they work completely differently.
Vista/XP are obviously different versions
but the majority rules and a majority of people (myself included) like the fact windows media player and messenger comes with the system it makes it a lot easier to get started.
Windows 7 isn't much different (apart from the Interface) to Vista. This link sums up the different versions of Windows 7 if you are interested, and Vista Editions here.
Vista is Windows 6.0 and 7 is offically Windows 6.1, where as XP was 5.1 and 2000 was 5.0
Vista is Windows 6.0 and 7 is offically Windows 6.1, where as XP was 5.1 and 2000 was 5.0
Broken Viking
On Moderation
That's always been a headache for me when I've been trying to make the switch over to Linux. Ironically enough though, I'm now just starting to get my head around the concept of a "home" directory from having learned a bit more about roaming profiles in Windows NT, of all things!
hock:If ye are currently running XP, a simple way to view thy "Home" folder is to go to My Pictures (Or any other folder in your documents), then - Assuming you've got the address bar set to show the full path of the current object - Edit the path to read C:\Documents and Settings\[UserName]\ and hit "Go". It took me a while to learn this, but Win 2K+ systems also use Linux-esque home trees - They just provide an extra folder for user documents, and direct the user there whenever the user wants to see their files. 8)
It's still there in Windows XP, but this time it's no longer a part of the OS setup process. To access it, simply go Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs then hit the Add/Remove Windows components option on the left hand side.
I don't know if it's still in that location in Vista and VII, but if nothing else it might be the best place to start!
Wouldn't The GIMP be a cheaper and more than adequete substitute for Photoshop?
poshbakerloo
Member
Windows 7 is much faster! I have it on my laptop and it starts up much faster and logs in fast than when it was on Vista!
Ironically enough though, I'm now just starting to get my head around the concept of a "home" directory from having learned a bit more about roaming profiles in Windows NT, of all things!
NT was great (10 years ago) NT server was the first server operating system I administered, never forget the fun we had with Network Policies and Profiles. Particurlarly annoying if you had a BDC and active repl$
Its much easier in Vista, click start and there's a button with your username on it! and the direct link is \Users\YourUsername
It's still there in Windows XP, but this time it's no longer a part of the OS setup process. To access it, simply go Control Panel > Add/Remove Programs then hit the Add/Remove Windows components option on the left hand side.
I don't know if it's still in that location in Vista and VII, but if nothing else it might be the best place to start!
It's still there in Vista, but its under Programs and Features, then Turn Windows Features on and off - and here in lies the change, XP onwards, this option didn't remove unwanted applications bundled with the Operating System, just hid them from the user, where as back in the 9x days it removed them.
Wouldn't The GIMP be a cheaper and more than adequete substitute for Photoshop?
Cheaper yes, adequate probably not, depends if you are doing more than just basic photo resizing etc.
Strange that it's based on BSD, and can run mac os, linux and windows with ease.
Geezertronic
Established Member
If telnet or SSH is enabled, it doesn't take much for someone to hack and burn your machine, same with Windows and Remote Desktop. Why do you think that corporates spend loadsa money on system security.
Well Gawd almighty.. I did not know that fella. In that case does the threat from the nasty guys not apply?
I'd be most surprised if you could find a mainstream linux distribution in the last decade that didn't come with a firewall by default, and that wasn't set to a very high level of security by default.
Depends on what features you require - photoshop was created by teams of professional programmers, while GIMP is maintained by programmers in their spare time, often using algorithms that PhD students have devised.
Considering there are hundreds of servers running the same stable versions of ssh that can be downloaded by any linux machine, or indeed that run on mac os x, BSD, etc, I'd be very surprised if that was true, even if your password was short.
Not quite sure what you mean? Do you mean that you find the folder names cryptic? /usr versus /Applications or /home vs /Users ?
Linux does make installing and updating programmes a breeze though, thanks to the package manages (rpm / apt-get). A mate of mine brought a new mac book pro and was annoyed that he had to update everything in more than one place (one place for Apple stuff, one place for MS office, and one for GNU stuff) whereas in linux, everything bar his proprietary nvidia drivers can be updated from one place.
Geezertronic
Established Member
Difference for servers is that your average Corporate server is behind at least 1 layer of physical firewall which blocks port 22 access from external sources anyway. In the case of the servers I setup, the servers have a DMZ NIC and a Management NIC and SSH is only configured to listen on the Management NIC.
I was talking about the servers listening on port 22, such as the ones I use, shell.srcf.ucam.org and gate.eng.cam.ac.uk which don't seem to get hacked an awful lot. There are are a lot more, not to mention the same protocols are used for ssh tunnelling used in online-shopping.
I have no idea what a "physical" firewall is other than the literal meaning of a fire-resistance opaque divide. Did you mean external firewall? I cannot understand why you're setting up servers with physically separate networks, which would be like having two separate road systems around an industrial site, one for external access and one for internal transport, rather than just having security blockades protecting secure areas. Why can't you connect them both to the same switch and take advantage of the extra bandwidth, and block port 22 on the external firewall?
I shall have to delve into this a bit deeper. I have half a dozen Linux books but each seems to use different terminology. I might order the latest Ubuntu Cd [don't want to download it. I HATE ISO] Then go from there. I have a pare partiton on my 0 disk
Any particular reason for being against ISO, just out of interest?
I guess the difference in terminology simply results because there are multiple ways of expressing the same thing, but each author has his/her own preference. I've always called directories, directories, because I grew up and used computes when they were called solely that on windows and Dos, whereas many GUIs these days call them folders. It's the same with command prompt, shell session and terminal, though there are subtle differences between them all.
The unix file structure is well-documented and consistent across distributions, but I'd suggest you rely on installing applications to their default location, rather than where you see appropriate. Many applications distribute their components, so that executables may be put in one directory eg /usr/bin, libaries required to run those executables are kept in another eg /usr/lib/<application name> and system configuration in /etc. If you get really stuck, try using the locate command ie type in locate <application> in a terminal.
Broken Viking
On Moderation
Let me re-phrase that slightly: you
To determine how susceptable an open connection is to detection and intrusion, I once set up an open and unsecured network (A "Honeypot") on my connection whilst I was out for a couple of days. The two machines on it were one with RedHat IX with a home desktop install, and one with WinXP SP1.
The Linux box was hooked up directly to the Internet connection, and the Windows box was linked through the Linux one. Aside from a couple of iptables rules to serve traffic to and from the Windows box, both machines had firewalls disabled, had remote access systems (Telnet, SSH, XP Remote Desktop etc.) left on and open, and both machines had simple dictionary crackable passwords set. They also had some spoofed "personal" data files on (Mainly random DVD VOB files renamed as ZIPs etc.) and other deliberate "items of interest".
Both machines were made "visible" to the Internet by a Linux chron set to open an IRC connection between both systems and a popular Hacker's IRC server after I had left the house - A make them find me move chosen from an IRC-based attack that I experienced a few years ago.
After I returned about 50 hours later, I checked both boxes. The Linux machine had been cracked, "root" password changed (The hacked "root" account was a fake with a UID of 10, the real root had been renamed), reconfigured to act as an open relay, and already had an alien script set to chron at 02:00 the following morning which would've sent e-mail spam out all over the shop.
The less said about the Windows box, the better. There was so much crap running on it by the time I'd got back that I was forced to power it off by pulling the lead out of the back. The thing had become so heavily trojanised, that even a Safe Mode with Command Prompt boot (Not that that was an option - One trojan had disabled all forms of OS boot control) would've taken at least 20 minutes and would still have rendered the machine unusable!
Naturally, I now try to make sure that I have every available security precaution running on my network to minimise the scope of damage. Wisely configured firewalls (On every machine, as well as my painfully basic SOHO router), MAC address-based access permissions, and restricted user accounts are just three of many precautions that I make use of.
After all...It took me over a week of strict quarantine to thoroughly scrub both "Honeypot" machines clean of data and all known potential avenues of infection - Including flashing the BIOSes on the motherboard, video card and HDD controllers - And I'd rather not have to go through that process on a non disposable machine!
hock:Personally, I prefer ISO images to physical media in many circumstances. Because Linux distros change very often and the ISOs are always being updated, I don't like the idea of wasting DVD-Rs that will becom obsolete in a very short space of time. Thanks to the ISO format - Which can be mounted virtually using tools like Alcohol 120% - I can download and use ISO files very easily, and I now only burn a disk when I actually need to!
As I tend to produce a lot of customised CD/DVD media and data collections, the ISO format allows me to preview and test an image before burning, and I burn very few coasters as a result...Indeed, the only four I've ever done were two system recovery disks (Bad install of Roxio Burner in Vista HB) and two video collections (Donated media which turned out to be a bad batch) 8)
I don't mind getting programmes or what ever on CD's but I have been told you can save an ISO on a USB thingy. Is that so? Another thing that came up while I was in bed was that I recalled an OS a few years ago that you could actually run from a CD without need to save it on your C drive. Can't remember it's name though.
You can run Linux persistently from a CD, yes. But you won't be able to save anything.
You can install it on a USB drive - that's what I've done. pendrivelinux.com is your friend.
I think I phrased it badly when I said you don't need a firewall on Linux. Personally I don't think it is necessary, just a good idea. Not many viruses etc are written for Linux.
You can install it on a USB drive - that's what I've done. pendrivelinux.com is your friend.
I think I phrased it badly when I said you don't need a firewall on Linux. Personally I don't think it is necessary, just a good idea. Not many viruses etc are written for Linux.
The firewall simply acts as an extra layer of protection, so simply not running the port-listening services would nullify the need for a firewall. I wouldn't be surprised if the iPhone, for example, didn't have a firewall!
Had you set secure passwords, set up ssh to lock a user account after a set number of incorrect passwords for a fixed period, and permanently blocked whole ip ranges after an even higher number of incorrect passwords, I dare say the machined would have survived well over a year.
But once installed you never have to run an dvd-based install again, and if need be you can reinstall using the older dvd and update.
You must have a huge dislike for Windows then and a slight annoyance at Mac OS X. I must admit the ability in linux (and other GNU OSes) to automatically download, extract and configure new applications with one single command is unrivalled! I know a mate whose only thing that cannot be installed or updated with a package manager is the proprietary nvidia drivers, which are also the only things that are buggy on the system.
Geezertronic
Established Member
A physical firewall is a piece of hardware that sits there in your network rack doing firewall tasks. Examples are Cisco ASAs, Nokia Checkpoints, Juniper ISG's etc... I don't refer to them as external firewalls as they can also be used for internal (i.e. not Internet facing) security. I also use the phrase Physical Firewall as some of the brands provide virtual instances.
You've obvioulsy not been asked to configure systems that need to adhere to Government/MOD and/or PCI Security standards...
Well I bit the bullet and made a CD from the ISO. Now I have spent 2 days fartarsing about trying to make a dual boot system W7/Ubuntu. Oh yes the CD works and I have an empty partition but on the first attempt only W7 showed up on boot. Second time I tried side-by-side installation and lost a partition altogether. Third time I tried nominating a partition to install Linux on but it keeps asking me for some sort of boot configuration which I don't know how to get to. It says I must use a partition menu but where that is I haven't the faintest.
As for W7 it still has the age old bugbear of having to reboot every time you install something. I really, really hate and detest that. Why can't M,soft do something about that after all these years?
As for W7 it still has the age old bugbear of having to reboot every time you install something. I really, really hate and detest that. Why can't M,soft do something about that after all these years?
Last edited:
- Status