Linux rant again
I have always been puzzled by the reticence of some less than technical persons regarding the Linux experience. If a while ago Linux has been considered the geeky text-only interface, now it’s been many years since the graphical look has exceeded the old Windows (even though it still resembles the functional start menu and taskbar). Aggressive promotion from Linspire and Ubuntu has made tremendous progress in providing a functional alternative to Windows and those targeted have in fact been the less than savvy computer users. Why?
Well, for one, it’s all in the same pack. The installation takes around 3 clicks, not to mention it’s this one installation that gives you everything on a golden plate: office applications, browsing ability, irc clients, newsreaders, application managers, system managers, codecs, drivers, mediaplayers … and on and on. Usually for each type of application you can think of, Linux gives you two: one that resembles the Windows counterpart and one fully-featured and more functional. Did I mention it’s all done for you in the same install? No more need to desperately call the next-door neighbor (aka me in so many cases to give you a fully installed usable Windows box (yeah, with all the dreadful drivers installation, office and codes).
And if by some miracle, the applications you get in those 20 minutes it takes for your box to become operational aren’t all that you need, you get this nifty application manager that gives you a full list of all you can install, thousands and thousands of applications sorted by their purpose: office, internet, system, educational, games, media and so on. No more running around on various sites to download and install, all there is now it’s just a click away. From web-servers to programming interfaces, IDE’s, star charts and trackers, accounting apps, DVD makers, all you can imagine. Between all of them, there’s exactly 0 functionality left not addressed (yeah and it took me a couple of years of experimentation and testing to see there’s nothing missing) .
And if you’re still at a loss you can install and run your much beloved Windows program (if by any divine intervention you haven’t found a native application that couldn’t do the same thing better) just as you would in Windows.
But what matters most of all is definitely the security issue. Sure it’s been said and debated so much all around that most people dismiss it by saying that both operating systems are just as unsafe. Yet things aren’t that simple and there are a few reasons for that.
It’s been argued that if Linux would have as many users as Windows, there would be much more exploits found and many more viruses created and it would turned out to be as much of a disappointment as Windows is. But is that really so? Let’s not forget that while Windows is dominating the desktop, Linux is the server king. The vast majority of servers on the Internet are running one kind of another of Linux and there’s a reason for that: Linux is much harder to break and Apache (the webserver of choice) is much less exploitable that IIS. And then again, on the same line of thinking, aren’t servers the most prized trophies of a hacker? The most one can get out of a personal computer is to turn it into a zombie and use it for further exploitation but again a Linux box would do better at that since a compromised Linux box gives access to a wide range of hacking utilities.
And the cause of that is the system’s architecture. On Windows almost anything that gets installed out of the box is linked together with the most preposterous hole of all: having a web browser integrated. Yes, the much blamed Internet Explorer is such a core application that Windows (and many other Microsoft Products) can’t run without it. You can hide it, but you can’t remove it (likewise for Mediaplayer, who uses IE to get stuff around Internet too). And yes, IE is known to pick up all sorts of nasties from around the net and places them right into your computer, despite the firewall and despite the antivirus (many antivirus products become useless this way, few of them being capable to kick IE in the shin and take over inspection regardless). Now I’m not saying Windows is useless in this regard. OF course a Windows box can be packed for security and still used but I’m talking about the not-so-savvy user and unfortunately the out-of-the-box Windows system is just one big security hole. Basically with all the integration we see, if one core application can be breached then the system is breached and provided you discover the intruder (many people live with trojans and worms and spyware never discovering them, but always complaining about Windows breaking down, when it’s actually Windows’ fault only indirectly).
On Linux however, things are better. Since the structure is not one-piece, various applications are independent and any application has only the same access as the user who runs it. On Windows, to have things working, a user must be of administrator level or of the same privileges, therefore any penetrated application can wreck the system, but on Linux a broken application is limited to itself.
(to be continued)