That doesnt change the fact that Linux fails in every area where it interacts with the User :P (Its improving though!)
And its not like Linux is immune to Viruses...its just a fact that the average Linux user is far more advanced with Computers than the average Windows Users and updates his stuff more regularly and is more aware.
I dont think Linux people are running 5 year old Linux distros without any Security updates, yet there are insanely many that run a not updated Windows XP SP2 or even worse...or are Linux people installing a program from a popup that says: YOUR PC IS INFECTED PLEASE INSTALL SUPER ANTIVIRUS NOW!!!!! ? I dont think so (assuming it would run on Linux)
Not to mention that the Linux home User group is far far far far smaller than the Windows group and its not like every Linux User is running the same distro etc. etc. if there is a Security Vulnerability in that distros specific lets say Window Manager then it just targets a small percentile of the Linux users, while with Windows it would target everyone.
Its the same with Browser exploits. using a Browser that is used by less than 2% (Opera/Chrome/Safari(on Windows)) of the Internet Users is normally less susceptable to any exploits than IE or FF is, just because the targeting group is so small.
If you are updating your Windows, using a Virus Scanner, a Firewall/Router, occasionally scan for Spyware and dont install suspicious stuff you normally will never encounter a Virus in your life.
Iam not defending Windows here but its just ridiculous how some people argument :P
Another thing to remember is that Linux is not immune to viruses, it's simply the case that few - if any - are actually coded for it. It's the same situation with Macs. Those malcontent's that create viruses do so for maximum impact - so they code for the most popular (in terms of market share) with the knowledge that there will be a greater proportion of inexperienced users that will allow the virus into their system.
I dare say if any of the Linux distros ever become popular enough, then we would see viruses popping up on them also.
As for Windows 7, been using it since launch and I must say it's been smooth sailing all the way (well, once I got it to recognise my DVD drive again).
Ya know guys... drama warning. Keep this thread about using the beta, not about beating dead zhevras.
Hey! I'm getting a live one soon..... *sniff*
Back on topic, If a person has dealt with v or nLite for the past 4 or so of it's existence, you got numerous ways to turn or or even remove some components that might oppose deadly for the home user. Let's say you'd liek to have n get a safe running PC with Win running on fro your kid(s) or wife, or the other way around. Both n/vLite happens to need very little time on the learning curve, and the rest can be found at the site hosting and the official board having it's own section(s). Look, I'm not trying to bring you into using em! Just talkign out loud here.
Anyways, vLite also happens to work on Win7 as well, with some minor restrictions on what's possible to remove and so on... Remote desktop for example, do you even use it? No? Remove it's functions altogether. and the list goes on and it' easy to browse once you have the actual app and source to play with. Win7 looks promising, and the only 2 bugs left (for me at least) are the Search services (Indexing and another one) that needs to be fixed/removed or even turned off.
And what about Phanx clubbing little innocent seals? *sniff*
About W7, wasn't one of the first things said about it, that it would not be build on Vista?
Think I read quotes from an interview saying so... Or was that for the Windows after this already?
There were some misleading informations about that.
Windows 7 was meant to be the "new" OS with a complete new Kernel etc., but that was never a intention from Microsoft iirc, it was just said like that by the media.
I think Vista needed to get on the market earlier than the developers wanted to they couldn't wait another 2-3 years till its "complete" now they finish what Vista should've been with Windows 7.
But after Windows 7 its rumoured that we get a complete new OS with a 40MB Kernel (instead of 300MBish now) but who knows :D
I switched back to Vista for now because of some things that annoyed me. For example did Aero break down on a regular basis, mostly when i alt-tabbed out of WoW, instead of showing the aero borders i had some half-transparent gibberish from the WoW gfx.
And the open/save file dialogs behaved kinda weird. In Notepad++ on Vista, when i view some file, and click Open, it'll point the dialog to the dir of the first file, which i like and use. On Win7, it always goes to the last folder i ever used the Open dialog in .. that drove me nuts :P
Some other kinks in the library i noticed, and the superbar still needs some work.
Not sure if this is the best place to ask this question, but some of you might be a little better with this than me.
My computer right now has 2 raided 250 gig hard drives. I want to keep my current vista installation, so I will be adding another 180 gig drive to the mix to install Windows 7 on. How difficult is it going to be to have windows 7 and ubuntu on the new 180 gig drive? Will I be able to see all 3 os's when I boot up? Is my computer going to blow up? Etc. Thanks :D
There's going to be a big, smokin hole in the ground where your house is! If you do it right, you should be able to boot all three, however, not quite like you envision it.
You'll only have one "windows" entry, and when you select it, you can choose "Windows 7" or "Previous version of windows"
Well that seems like it will work fine. I'm having my husband do it, so he should be home soon from playing rock band to put in the other drive and set everything up. I have windows and ubuntu burned, so I did enough :P
No blowing up the computer..I just bought it!! Wish me luck!
There wasn't any place to backup the files as my only external drive was the one I put into the computer.
So I wanted to come back today and give the good news, unfortunately there is only bad news to give. Installing the new drive went fine, my husband I don't think could have foreseen what happened after that. Windows 7 did NOT detect the raid drive, which was fine, but would not reformat or partition the other drive, kept giving an error. So we gave up on that. We decided to give the whole drive to Linux, which neither of us thought would be a big deal. Ubuntu noticed the raid drive, but only as 2 250g, not one drive.
Neither one of us thought that the MBR being on the vista raid drives would be a big deal, but in installing to the boot record it somehow basically blew up the raid setup and made both drives unrecoverable.
It's unfortunate, I lost a lot of music, my husband lost an instant messenger he wrote. I lost all my wow ui's, all my wallpaper, any visual styles I had worked on. Many, many programs and serial numbers that we have incurred over the years. So anyways, you win some, you lose some. I can't think of anything we could have done differently, my husband went to school for computer science so he's pretty decent at what he does. I'm pretty sure we will have to unraid the drives and leave them apart in order to the linux to write to the boot record without breaking stuff. At this point I'm unsure.
We'll be tackling the rest of the saga tonight when he gets done with work.
Which is why you unplug the drives you're not going to use for the system drive when you install an OS.. ALWAYS... :P
One drive for system, one drive from data you don't want to lose.
I offered that suggestion, but as of this moment I don't remember why he said he didn't do that. Thanks Tek btw, I might actually be able to set up things the way I want it.
So, if you have a second Tek, what if I want to reraid the 2 250 gigs and install Vista on them. Then I want to partition the 120 in half, and install windows 7 on half and ubuntu on the other half. Tell me if my steps are right if you don't mind:
Reraid the drives, install Vista and drivers.
Unplug the raid drives, use Windows 7 to partition the 120g in half, install windows 7 on one half.
Here's where my confusion is. Ubuntu needs to add an entry to the MBR. There's now a MBR on the 120 drive where Windows 7 is, but, am I going to be able to choose from either version of windows and linux? Sorry to sound newish at this, but I've never had raided drives and normally just installed windows to one drive and linux to the other drive. Thankyou for the help, I much appreciate it. We can take this to another thread as not to derail the windows 7 thread if you like.
Well, I know nothing of raid, so I doubt I can help there. And I don't mess with partitioning drives usually, I'd toss a cheap 40GB drive in and install your new OS on it to play with. I keep the large drives in a separate computer completely, and toss all my big archival files (music, videos) over to it. I also run bittorrent over there, so that we only run one instance for the whole house, and I don't clog up my computer with downloads.