rage2's rant of the week (3/28/05)

[rage2]

A few days late, I apologize...

*nix is better than Windows - The argument is getting fucking tiring

Why do people, namely *nix admins that are very anti-Microsoft, still pushing this retarded argument? It's a huge waste of time, a huge waste of productivity, and a burden on our IT infrastructures today. The last few days have been hell for me, basically dealing with an IT department that was very pro *nix, to the point where they believe ANYTHING to do with Microsoft is insecure. I won't go into details, as it's confidential work stuff, but I will say that I will never step foot into India. I like curry, but it's still not worth it.

Lets dig deeper into this "*nix is better than Windows" statement, and why I believe it's fucking stupid. The hardcore *nix admins claim (and believe) that Windows is an insecure mess of an OS. Yes it's true, any Windows OS (except the recently released Windows XP w/integrated SP2), when you install it by default and slap it on the internet, chances are, you'll get compromised. I'll give them that. But this ALSO holds true for many default installations of *nix OS's. Some sort of a vulnerability exist with most default installations, that's why you do NOT use default installations. Well, smart admins don't anyways.

What the *nix admins will not admit to is that Windows, like any other OS, CAN be secured, otherwise, I'd be unemployed today. If you're smart about it, you don't even need to patch immediately when something gets discovered. I don't do it on my servers, even the ones sitting on the internet, because we're not going to take a server down on Microsoft's patch schedule. I've taken great precautions to ensure that only essential services are running and/or exposed, and made sure that those services do not have a chance to be exploited by restricting various parameters (especially with IIS web server). Guess what? *nix admins do the same thing with their OS's and services, but I don't fucking know why they can't grasp the concept that THE EXACT SAME THING CAN BE APPLIED TO WINDOWS. Just because it's made by Microsoft? Who knows, I'll never understand 'em. Maybe that's why those guys don't get laid.

Why is Windows getting such a bad security rap? Well, the media has a lot to do with it. It's much more interesting to bash a successful company than it is to bash a bunch of guys on pure cheetos and coca-cola diets. That's what the media does. That's why we know everything about Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston, they're popular. Do you know who Pauly Shore is dating? No, because nobody gives a shit, so it's not reported. Another reason is that Windows is such a popular OS, pretty much a monopoly on the market. Pulling up my logs for yesterday's traffic, Microsoft OS's account for a staggering 96.3% of all traffic hitting beyond. Mac trails second at 3.1%, and *nix variants are a measly 0.6%. Now, as a virus writer, or someone looking to hunt for vulnerabilities for my gain, why would I go after 0.6% of the machines out there, when the chances of finding an insecure machine is much higher when I can target 96.3% of the machines out there? Back before Windows was a popular server OS, there were next to NO vulnerabilities for windows. There were a few annoyances to end users (remember the good old Ping of Death?) but all the attacks were on *nix systems. Rooted boxes on the net causing waves of denial of service attacks. The good old days. You never saw the Windows guys make fun of *nix now did you??? I don't get it.

With that, you may wonder, why do I choose Windows over *nix? I used to run several slackware linux boxes at work. They were secure, ran well, used very little hardware. Why the switch to Windows if it's so targetted, and so bad security wise? In my case, it's productivity. I'm good enough to know how to secure both OS's, but when it comes to doing day to day work, I'm a LOT faster working with Windows. It's a nifty concept called "Ease of Use". Granted, I was never a top level *nix expert, I knew enough to secure my servers, and to get things done. With windows OS's, learning new OS's, new services, very easy to do. Takes very little time to learn the basics, how to get around and get things done. As 1 person, I can manage 100 windows servers with the same amount of effort as managing 30 *nix servers. When I hire IT help, I don't have to hire guys with 10 years of *nix experience (which still doesn't guarantee shit), I can hire guys out of college, low salary, and they will do as good a job as guys with 5 years experience. Makes a lot of business sense.

Ease of Use. This is the secret behind many businesses, including Microsoft. This is why such a "bad OS" can have such a HUGE market dominance. Sure, they're accused of using their monopoly to strenthen their market dominance, but remember, they didn't start out as a monopoly. They got there through Ease of Use. Why's beyond so successful? Same theory. We simplified many of the tough tasks, made life easy for our users, that's why you guys are here. Look at how BMW is struggling with their new i-drive system. Not everyone is a geek/rocket scientist. Not everyone will want to (or can) learn how to turn on the AC by navigating through 2 levels of menus, when a simple button will suffice. There's some business advice for you guys out there.

So please... if you're an anal *nix admin, all I ask is give Windows a try, or at least be OPEN to someone that wants network interoperability with Windows, instead of slamming them and refusing to do anything they say just because they're using a Microsoft product. 96.3% of us are begging you to help us get BOTH our jobs done.

Thank you.

[benyl]

You stat of 96.3% is there because Windows is easy.

Most of the kids on beyond don't even know what Unix/Linux/Aix even is. They just use what came on their computer.

From a Enterprise perspective, you can't deny that 80% of the market is running Unix/Aix/Sun Solaris. That is just the Enterprise standard.

Windows 2003 Server is starting to get market share (from what I hear anyway).

Microsoft just doesn't make anything that is carrier grade (Telecom) and thus, no Large Telcos will use it.

I only use Windows cause I can't be bothered fooling around with Linux on my home PCs.

I do prefer:

ls -la

over

dir

hahahaha

(On a side note, there are a lot of things that can be done in *nix with a simple command on the command line that takes 15 clicks in windows).

[rc2002]

Most of the kids on beyond don't even know what Unix/Linux/Aix even is. They just use what came on their computer.

Hehehe. That almost describes me. I only use linux for my programming classes. Windows is definitely easier to use and more inuitive - maybe it's because I've used it for so long. But there's tons of support for it if anything goes wrong.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

I guess it comes down to relative ease of use. For small servers and applications thereof, *ix may be the easiest choice for many people. It's pretty simple, pretty barebones, and it does the job. Naturally, when their needs grow, they will continue to use *ix on their progressively larger applications, mostly because it's what they're used to. However, while a Windows server may seem tricky to use in a small system, it's all relative. Once you get into larger systems, the Windows system starts to shine. Unfortunately, since many people choose familiarity over functionality, *ix will continue to be dominant.

Sociologically, many people feel good about "sticking it to the man", mainly because Bill Gates is the public Microsoft figure. I mean, heck, who [i]isn't jealous of Bill's money? I know I sure am. Thus, a lot of people get a kick out thinking they're somehow reducing his cash flow by running *ix on their system. Hence the large amounts of anti-Microsoft "propaganda" out there.




Disclaimer: I am not a system admin. Anything I type regarding this should be taken with a grain of salt; my opinion is formulated through discussions with programmers, admins, etc.

[Xtrema]

Amount of stuff you can script in *nix ownz windows.

Too many Windows app writer depend too much graphical GUI.

*nix also has way smaller footprint so you can drive more small devices.

And Linux is free, you can get away with a lot of network funtinalities with it without paying MS a penny (in small scope anyway).


Anyway, I do agree with rage's assessment of anal *nix admins, I have dealt with a few in my career.

[benyl]

Another advantage of *nix systems.

tail -f filename

Can't do that in windows. Every programmer needs it for debugging!

[rage2]

Hehe, such a quiet rant. I knew it though, it was a geeky one this week but it really pissed me off.


Originally posted by benyl
(On a side note, there are a lot of things that can be done in *nix with a simple command on the command line that takes 15 clicks in windows).
Thats why I always have a cmd prompt open. I do a LOT of stuff via cmd prompt.


Originally posted by Xtrema
Amount of stuff you can script in *nix ownz windows.
That's debatable. Windows scripting host, try it sometimes. VBS and JScript are very powerful, I use 'em everyday to do custom stuff. I'd say it's just as powerful as say, perl or tcl scripting in *nix.

Originally posted by Xtrema
Too many Windows app writer depend too much graphical GUI.

Depends on what you're doing. I do a lot of non GUI scripting cuz I'm a sysadmin, just have to get the job done. Our programmers at the office do a lot of GUI stuff because it's for clients, guys that want a clean interface. See my first post regarding "ease of use".

Originally posted by benyl
Another advantage of *nix systems.

tail -f filename

Can't do that in windows. Every programmer needs it for debugging!
Sure you can. There are tons of FREE cmd line versions of tail for windows. MS even packages one now with Windows 2003 Resource Kit. I personally use a GUI version which is much better (for me) than the cmd line version:

http://tailforwin32.sourceforge.net/

Point is, whatever you can do in *nix, you can do it in Windows.

[seer_claw]

I grew up using the various versions of windows starting with 3.11. I am now very familar with how windows works and how to get things running the way that I like them running. I am not so familar with Linux and remember the intense learning curve when trying to install and use it on one of my home computers. I gave up soon enough and put windows back on. THe familarity with windows allowed to to catch a virus and get rid of it within an hour without having to reformat or lose any valuable information on my system. With my current knowlege of linux I would have been lost.

I guess growing up without the variety of systems has biased me but based on your rant its not really all that bad. ;)

[Khyron]

Before win2k I'd have agreed that nix was superior in "most" areas, aside from desktops and simple file/domain servers.

For web hosting, IIS/Frontpage sites took 10x the resources of the same site on a simple linux apache server. Hell, Microsoft has only just caught up now. And you have to admit, IIS 4 was fucking garbage, and no one knew how to secure their exchange servers. Giving someone a full email server all set to go out of the box, completely wide open, is not a pro IMO. I lost track of how many times I had to phone clients with open relays and find out no one there knew anything about it.

But yah, making that argument today doesn't really hold water. They both have their uses.

Khyron

[RickDaTuner]

Cntrl + Alt + Delete seem to be the end of all my problems, when it comes to computers :dunno:

[speedracer]

Originally posted by rage2
Point is, whatever you can do in *nix, you can do it in Windows. [/B]

It's just not as elegant. And in many aspects not possible yet.

I have to agree with Benyl. Under an Enterprise level M$ is climbing the ladder to catch up. But the reverse is true for small to medium companies that like the ease of use and ease to book keep.

But I think in Alberta you will find the ratio of *nix servers to be overwhelming. Damn telecos and oil and gas industry ;)

Besides the server OS wars. I think the resent is the corporate culture image.*nix is seen as a work in progress - a community. M$ is seen as the bully that borrows and then claims they lead the way.

I'm surprise no mac advocate is touting mac servers
:rofl: ;)

[googe]

man, i hope beyonds functionality (or lack thereof) as of late isnt a testament of windows stellar performance ;)

[RickDaTuner]

Originally posted by googe
man, i hope beyonds functionality (or lack thereof) as of late isnt a testament of windows stellar performance ;) :rofl: :rofl:

[Ashkente]

A-friggin'-men. It's popular and trendy to hate Microsoft. I give people at school shit about it all the time when they're all "BLEA BLEA BLEA M$ IS TEH SHITZ." I usually say just "Why?" and they're all "uhhh...uhhh..." It's retarded. I run a nice mix of Linux and windows, and everyone is happy. Reliable routing, webserving (on "shitty" hardware too! That's another rant though..people who think <1Ghz machines etc. are "ancient" :rolleyes: ) and windows workstations so the rest of the family leaves me alone! :D

And for all those people who want *nix cmd line stuff in windows...: Cygwin ;)

[AllGoNoShow]

I personally use FreeBSD and Windows XP SP2 myself. Have used other nix variants out there but settled on FreeBSD for server usage.

I totally agree with rage's statement. If you take the time to secure nix or the time to secure windows, then you will be safe. I believe that windows gets a bad rep for security and insecure applications because of the fact that the population that uses it is much larger then the population that uses nix, so therefor the word is spread out and attacked alot quicker if you follow me. It also means that if a group of geeks wished to release a trojan or exploit to effect the most machines possible, it would be more logical to choose an OS which people use the most, therefor Windows, so therefor if they find a hole in ONE windows program, it may effect millions of computers around the world. Where as if they exploit ONE *nix program, they have to find out which OS's use it and etc. etc.. etc.. it just isn't worth the same amount of time.

Although I must admit, the stability of the FreeBSD box and other FreeBSD installs I have used is much higher then my old Windows XP install. The main contribution to that I believe was the XP box was OC'd and non upgraded cooling and it was basically spelling, crash me I'm overheating.

Thats all I got to say, hopefully it made some sort of sense.

[rage2]

Originally posted by googe
man, i hope beyonds functionality (or lack thereof) as of late isnt a testament of windows stellar performance ;)
haha, knew that would come up ;).

It has to do with bad hardware. BUT because we do run PHP through IIS, it's not stellar performance. It runs a bit better with apache and linux (about 20% better).

Contemplating moving to IIS6 though which handles PHP much better, but have had no time to play with that yet.

[Tyler883]

I'm 100% microsoft at the moment, but I have 2 computers at home.

so I think I'll be making one of them linux based, then load it up with open source software like Open Office

People are getting tired of having to upgrade their software - at rates dictated by Microsoft - every few years.Canyou imagine what a small company with a few dozen computers pays to use microsoft software? Its not a laughing matter anymore....$600 for MS Office for every computer adds up in a hurry.

I like the GNU liscense agreement where I can get the software for free, and others that contribute money get a say on which features get developed next. Governents like the German government can throw millions of dollars at Open Office and still save compare to liscensing every one of their computer for Microsaft Office

In the late 80s and most of the 90s. I was a big fan of Microsoft, but lately I'm beginning to see them in a different light. I think they need to restructure their liscensing model, and start developing some corporate ethics. They leave alot to be desired.

BTW, I'm not an *nux admin, just a electronics tech with some home computer experience.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Tyler883
I like the GNU liscense agreement where I can get the software for free, and others that contribute money get a say on which features get developed next. Governents like the German government can throw millions of dollars at Open Office and still save compare to liscensing every one of their computer for Microsaft Office

In the late 80s and most of the 90s. I was a big fan of Microsoft, but lately I'm beginning to see them in a different light. I think they need to restructure their liscensing model, and start developing some corporate ethics. They leave alot to be desired.


Again, MS scores low on the public opinion poll because the public only knows MS and wants to bash it.

If you think MS charging $600 for office every few years is unreal, you should check out Sun, Oracle, EMC and many others. Their mandatory support contracts etc. It's a lot worse.

[rage2]

^^^ took the words right outta my mouth.

Getting a SUN oracle box at work for our development team was fun. Expensive for such a POS piece of hardware. Hardware costs were jacked up, and most of it was in software costs. For the same price, we could've gotten 2 wintel servers that's 3x more powerful along with full CPU licenses of MS SQL server. Then we ordered some more memory for it, and fuck, it was like 4x the cost of normal RAM. Crazy.

[Tyler883]

Can't we somewhat credit Sun for getting OpenOffice started?

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Here's an interesting article on the subject:

http://www.reuters.com/audi/newsArticle.jhtml?type=technologyNews&storyID=8081477

[Tyler883]

Yup, my employer implemented both Windows and Linux servers to meet their needs, too.

Appearantly, their needs included a server that likes to crash every once in awhile, so the got the windows server for that need.

The linux server didn't meet their needs very well, because it has NEVER crashed.

[rage2]

Tyler883, you're an idiot. My rant is directed towards idiots like yourself.

[Tyler883]

Hey!

Idiots have feelings, too!!!

[EDM]

I used to be anti-microsoft. I didnt find win95/98/98se particularly great. BSoD's were the main reason, but today i dont need to use unix systems and i cant run games on em either. i like win2k :D

[bol]

Isn't this topic beat to death? Sure it's fun to poke fun at the other crowd but enough people have written these articles.


Now... Mac OS X Server and their XServe platform... LOL!

[AG_Styles]

it all again comes down to preference IMO.

I like using linux for writing programs(xemacs owns), but i like windows for ease of use and running programs(have emacs installed on windows too!!).
i like the simple navigation use in windows. i like the stability in linux.

however, it's important to know that these are just programs/OS's written by programmers. If anyone really put their minds to it, it's possible to crash either one (not easy, but possible). i don't care if it's linux or windows or how secure it can be. cuz if u look at the trends of systems, they have yet to develop a fully safe and secure op system that is 100% secure. they have made systems more secure, but not fullly secure.
sure linux is said to be more secure, but as rage2 has already so emphasized, so can windows.

preferences people.

[Tyler883]

A CEO of Motorola was quoted for saying that he enjoyed selling a product that doesn't quite work that way that the customer expects it to work.

Microsoft's software seems to be that way, too. Yet we keep running to the store to buy another box full of promises from Microsoft.

I like the open source approach, they have no bones in admitting that their products are in a continual mode of development.

[ehos]

There's no reason to be so dogmatic about OS's I agree.
However, some points...

Enterprise level = Unix/Linux.
User level, small time stuff = Windows.

How many big companies, bank, telcos etc use Windows for their servers?

Ever bought licences for all the Windows crap? It gets expensive. If you're running a legit business, all that has to be accounted for.

Hmm, actually for smaller stuff Windows is pretty horrible. What's easier to setup and use, IIS, Windows, MSSQL or Linux, Apache, mysql, php?

Windows is great for user level stuff. We used IIS, MSSQL, NT (oh god) and it was decent. I'd use Windows again (it's easy!) and there's no reason to stick 100% to an OS. Good to be flexible.

It's good you like Windows, but to toss out Unix is the same hypocracy you're trying to avoid.

[Tyler883]

Just some follow-up on this topic, I just bought a second computer to use as a "test bed" for a linux server/workstation,

I've installed Mandrake linux and was pleased to discover that it came bundled with open office( saved me the cost of buying microsoft office), an email program with time management features( saved me the cost of Outlook), mysql ( saved me the cost of MS SQL) , and apache webserver( saved me the cost of microsoft webserver), and it came bundled with Mozzila firefox( got me surfing the internet immediately after the install.

In fact, I'm using this linux system to write this message, and I didn't need to know anything to get my network/internet connection working.

[rage2]

Oh my, comparing MySQL to MSSQL. I can write a 10 page rant on mySQL. I'm trying to port vbulletin to MS SQL now because mySQL is so bad for high volume traffic like beyond.

[403Gemini]

yea sure windows isnt that secure

yea sure windows isnt that stable

but it sure as hell is universal, thats why i use it

[googe]

Originally posted by rage2
Oh my, comparing MySQL to MSSQL. I can write a 10 page rant on mySQL. I'm trying to port vbulletin to MS SQL now because mySQL is so bad for high volume traffic like beyond.

haha thats cause youre running it on windows ;)

dude if the argument is tiring (and i agree, it is, though i disagree with your position) dont bring it up :(

(the fact that was written that long ago and its still the same old shit thrown back and forth just shows you what happens when you do)

[atomic]

two thoughts...

A)
if the provider argues with your choice as a customer, then you can find another provider. of course the provider should be given an "acceptable" ammount of reasonable feedback for security, cost, flexibility and personal preference. but going as far to argue with an obviously intellegent customer to the point of writing a rant on a forum is too far. u should find a new provider :)


B)
http://www.hacknight.org/img/nerds.jpg

[atomic]

actually ... i'll append this statement that people who run linux on their desktop sucks0rs L0llerSK4t3z!!!1111!!!one!! :)


*poke googe*

it was hard to read this whole rant so i had to run it through my 17333373333733337373737373 translator http://www.softempire.com/leet-speak.html

[benyl]

Originally posted by atomic
two thoughts...

A)
if the provider argues with your choice as a customer, then you can find another provider. of course the provider should be given an &quot;acceptable&quot; ammount of reasonable feedback for security, cost, flexibility and personal preference. but going as far to argue with an obviously intellegent customer to the point of writing a rant on a forum is too far. u should find a new provider :)


B)
http://www.hacknight.org/img/nerds.jpg

wtf u talk'n bout Willis?

[TheBenzo]

I like Xandros.. but I dont like how it wont associatre with some of my windows files when I kissed the blue screen of death goodbye.

[rage2]

Originally posted by googe
haha thats cause youre running it on windows ;)
Actually, I moved it to a linux box, and the same problems are happening. MySQL is a funny database... yes it's FAST, when you're using myisam tables. That's because there's nothing, no proper locking, no transactions, nothing. Look at all the corruption you see here alone. Random threads with no posts, random db errors, non updated post counts.

OK, so if I want proper DB stuff, I'd have to use InnoDB tables. And guess what? It's slow as hell when you make MySQL act close to a real database. Drives me insane.

If only I was an oracle expert, I'd port to oracle, and not MS SQL.

[atomic]

Originally posted by benyl


wtf u talk'n bout Willis?

i'm saying.. :whocares: .. this discussion can only be had by experts of the os'/flavours of UNIX ; and differing enviroments have their relative requirements . this discussion has been ongoing since NT3.51 and will continue to do so .

And before NT3, it was against Novell and Lantastic.

And for workstation multitasking it was against OS2 and Quarterdeck Deskview. and then even Deskview had DeskviewX which was an X server for DOS to try to replace X11.

This will go on for ever..

I'm just glad no one mentioned OSX :barf:

and i'm also saying, you're all nerds :)

[bol]

Originally posted by atomic




I'm just glad no one mentioned OSX :barf:




LOL
Now that's an OS I can rant about, haha. Just... terrible.

[Tyler883]

Originally posted by rage2

OK, so if I want proper DB stuff, I'd have to use InnoDB tables. And guess what? It's slow as hell when you make MySQL act close to a real database. Drives me insane.


I'm an electronics technologist, not an IT professional. My goal is only to learn enough to create a working website, then switch my focus to making a business that is financially sustainable. If ( and it's probably a big "IF") the site gets big, I'll be hiring IT pros to do things that I don't understand, and probably never will understand.



Originally posted by atomic

and i'm also saying, you're all nerds :)


HAHAHA! et tu!

[JeremyD]

I've installed Mandrake linux and was pleased to discover that it came bundled with open office( saved me the cost of buying microsoft office), an email program with time management features( saved me the cost of Outlook), mysql ( saved me the cost of MS SQL) , and apache webserver( saved me the cost of microsoft webserver), and it came bundled with Mozzila firefox( got me surfing the internet immediately after the install.

From the desktop side of a enterprise environment I suspect you will end up paying the same amount for the "free" software, when you factor in training costs, support calls, loss in productivity and the like. It just comes from a different budget that is all. The average end user still has problems with MS related products but it is likely they have windows at home so they are more likely to have some exposure to it.

The only *nix based classes I was able to find were targetted for sys admins and techies. Nothing for the average end user. Nor was I able to find anything for open office.

[Tyler883]

Originally posted by JeremyD


From the desktop side of a enterprise environment I suspect you will end up paying the same amount for the &quot;free&quot; software, when you factor in training costs, support calls, loss in productivity and the like. It just comes from a different budget that is all. The average end user still has problems with MS related products but it is likely they have windows at home so they are more likely to have some exposure to it.

The only *nix based classes I was able to find were targetted for sys admins and techies. Nothing for the average end user. Nor was I able to find anything for open office.

You have a point if you employ a bunch of programmers and advanced users, but....

I don't know of very many people that needed to take classes on MS office in order to use the beginer and intermediate level features. IMO, these same people will not require classes for open office,

.The company that I work at made the transition to open office over a year ago, and everyone quickly learned that their end-user skills are easily transferable. I think the learning curve was less than an hour for most of them.

BTW, we were able to find reference manuals for open office, and as usual, they still 'creek' when you open them because no-one has ever read them.
.

[atomic]

Originally posted by Tyler883


You have a point if you employ a bunch of programmers and advanced users, but....


are you hiring people to waste time "plaing" in their dinky OS and uploading screenshots to customize.org .. or are you hiring people to produce a product/service?

microsoft makes it easy for companies by supplying seat licences and software available via msdn for development purposes as i'm sure you're aware and have expierenced.

fact is, unix and windows arguments are almost as relevant as argueing between Rainy Days and Steam Engines. ; they each have a place, but both involve h20.

i use both, and we develop for both . and benchmarks of specific applications on either OS should also help determine the choice. The project i work on shares different parts of the process between windows and linux accordingly. but our work is quite a bit more resource hungery and low level then the database web apps that 99.9% of programmers are used to :P

it's ironic that the database web programmers are the first in line to argue about what OS is better. ppl like us don't care because we know their relation to the application.

[Tyler883]

Sorry man, I just have great contempt for people that need to take a course on OpenOffice just so they can become an end user of it's basic features. I feel the same way about MS office, too.

In my personal experience, I've known people that have taken courses on MSword, then a few months later they come to me and ask me to help them with a resume, these people lack the transferable skills to work effectively in front of a computer.

Perhaps I can't look objectively at Jeremy's comments about training costs, because I have great contempt for anyone that can't figure out how to use something as painfully easy as a word processor.

Anyone that computer iliterate will not be asked to sit
at a computer and if that means I have to send them home, then so be it.

[atomic]

hahaha i had a good laugh at "great contempt for people that need tot ake a course on openoffice" . because it's actually getting that way .. linux is so easy to install now that all you need to know how to do is load a cd in the tray and reboot!

i bet if i left a redhat cd in my mothers cd drive .. that when she turned the computer on, she'd blindly follow through the installation thinking it was starting the computer :P

[rage2]

... and then she'll get rooted within 10 mins ;).

Actually, serious question, how secure are the redhat default installs nowadays?

[atomic]

that's a good question for googe to answer . he spends a lot more time then me with vulnerability data as i do now at work .

redhat was always one step "above" microsoft for releasing security updates and .dot releases . but they're still far beyond the "secure" distro's i'm sure ..

most of the redhat problems for a long time weren't really with the choice of binaries; it was with the implementation of them . user security and exploitable scripts or configurations .

well okay so i just did a quick query of our vulnerability database for all vulns affected by any Redhat Release over the past 30 days . and 100 Records Found ..



13785 Advanced Encryption Standard Cache Timing Key Disclosure Vulnerability 5/26/2005 9:30:07 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 6.7 8.9 8.0
13778 Apache HTPasswd Password Command Line Argument Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/26/2005 5:26:07 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 4.8 5.9 6.0
13777 Apache HTPasswd User Command Line Argument Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/26/2005 5:26:18 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 4.8 5.9 6.0
13775 Linux Kernel Cryptoloop Information Disclosure Vulnerability 5/27/2005 2:30:26 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 4.4 3.1 2.0
13715 Net-SNMP Fixprox Insecure Temporary File Creation Vulnerability 5/23/2005 10:59:53 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 8.4 7.5 10.0
13714 Qpopper Multiple Insecure File Handling Vulnerabilities 5/26/2005 2:17:06 PM CAN-2005-1151, CAN-2005-1152 6.2 4.2 4.0
13645 Mozilla Suite And Firefox DOM Property Overrides Code Execution Vulnerability 5/26/2005 6:15:39 PM CAN-2005-1532 8.5 8.3 8.0
13641 Mozilla Suite And Firefox Multiple Script Manager Security Bypass Vulnerabilities 5/26/2005 6:25:29 PM CAN-2005-1531 8.5 8.3 8.0
13591 Gaim Remote MSN Empty SLP Message Denial Of Service Vulnerability 5/26/2005 3:37:25 PM CAN-2005-1262 6.1 6.7 4.0
13590 Gaim Remote URI Handling Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/26/2005 3:37:32 PM CAN-2005-1261 7.5 8.9 8.0
13589 Linux Kernel ELF Core Dump Local Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 6/3/2005 1:59:09 PM CAN-2005-1263 7.2 7.5 10.0
13544 Mozilla Firefox Install Method Remote Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability 5/26/2005 3:41:55 PM CAN-2005-1476, CAN-2005-1477 8.3 8.0 8.0
13537 Apache HTDigest Realm Command Line Argument Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/16/2005 3:35:55 PM CAN-2005-1344 6.2 5.9 6.0
13504 Ethereal Multiple Remote Protocol Dissector Vulnerabilities 5/31/2005 1:38:34 PM CAN-2005-1456, CAN-2005-1457, CAN-2005-1458, CAN-2005-1459, CAN-2005-1460, CAN-2005-1461, CAN-2005-1462, CAN-2005-1463, CAN-2005-1464, CAN-2005-1465, CAN-2005-1466, CAN-2005-1467, CAN-2005-1468, CAN-2005-1469, CAN-2005-1470 8.9 8.9 8.0
13392 TCPDump ISIS Decoding Routines Denial Of Service Vulnerability 5/26/2005 3:37:19 PM CAN-2005-1278 5.8 6.7 4.0
100 records found


And then i just did the same query for my favourite distro, Slackware ... and only 67 records found . (may also be attributed to slackware having less default installation binaries)



13785 Advanced Encryption Standard Cache Timing Key Disclosure Vulnerability 5/26/2005 9:30:07 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 6.7 8.9 8.0
13778 Apache HTPasswd Password Command Line Argument Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/26/2005 5:26:07 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 4.8 5.9 6.0
13777 Apache HTPasswd User Command Line Argument Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/26/2005 5:26:18 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 4.8 5.9 6.0
13775 Linux Kernel Cryptoloop Information Disclosure Vulnerability 5/27/2005 2:30:26 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 4.4 3.1 2.0
13645 Mozilla Suite And Firefox DOM Property Overrides Code Execution Vulnerability 5/26/2005 6:15:39 PM CAN-2005-1532 8.5 8.3 8.0
13641 Mozilla Suite And Firefox Multiple Script Manager Security Bypass Vulnerabilities 5/26/2005 6:25:29 PM CAN-2005-1531 8.5 8.3 8.0
13591 Gaim Remote MSN Empty SLP Message Denial Of Service Vulnerability 5/26/2005 3:37:25 PM CAN-2005-1262 6.1 6.7 4.0
13590 Gaim Remote URI Handling Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/26/2005 3:37:32 PM CAN-2005-1261 7.5 8.9 8.0
13589 Linux Kernel ELF Core Dump Local Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 6/3/2005 1:59:09 PM CAN-2005-1263 7.2 7.5 10.0
13585 LibTIFF TIFFOpen Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/19/2005 6:49:28 PM CAN-2005-1544 7.1 8.3 8.0
13544 Mozilla Firefox Install Method Remote Arbitrary Code Execution Vulnerability 5/26/2005 3:41:55 PM CAN-2005-1476, CAN-2005-1477 8.3 8.0 8.0
13537 Apache HTDigest Realm Command Line Argument Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/16/2005 3:35:55 PM CAN-2005-1344 6.2 5.9 6.0
13290 GNU GZip Filename Directory Traversal Vulnerability 6/1/2005 2:54:04 PM CAN-2005-1228 7.8 7.2 6.0
13271 MPlayer MMST Stream ID Remote Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/18/2005 3:49:59 PM CAN-2005-1195 7.1 8.3 8.0
13270 MPlayer RTSP Server Line Response Remote Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/18/2005 3:49:54 PM CAN-2005-1195 7.1 8.3 8.0
67 records found

[atomic]

and to append some windows information ... i did the same query for Windows 2000 (all service packs) because that's what i run at home also .. and only 19 records found for the past 30 days ..



13837 Microsoft Outlook Express Attachment Processing File Extension Obfuscation Vulnerability 6/1/2005 10:26:08 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 6.5 6.7 5.0
13818 Microsoft Windows Remote Desktop Protocol Server Private Key Disclosure Vulnerability 5/31/2005 2:50:31 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 5.4 7.2 6.0
13676 Multiple Vendor TCP Timestamp PAWS Remote Denial Of Service Vulnerability 5/27/2005 9:15:11 PM CAN-2005-0356 8.2 7.8 6.0
13511 Microsoft May Advance Notification Unspecified Security Vulnerability 5/5/2005 6:26:41 PM CVE-MAP-NOMATCH 4.2 3.8 5.0
13248 Microsoft Windows Explorer Preview Pane Script Injection Vulnerability 5/10/2005 5:04:33 PM CAN-2005-1191 8.5 8.3 8.0
13124 Multiple Vendor TCP/IP Implementation ICMP Remote Denial Of Service Vulnerabilities 6/2/2005 4:28:49 PM CAN-2004-1060, CAN-2004-0791, CAN-2004-0790, CAN-2005-0068, CAN-2005-0067, CAN-2005-0066, CAN-2005-0065 8.2 7.8 6.0
13112 Microsoft Windows Message Queuing Remote Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/11/2005 3:02:04 PM CAN-2005-0059 9.6 10.0 10.0
12488 Microsoft OLE Remote Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/31/2005 10:36:32 PM CAN-2005-0044 8.2 10.0 10.0
12484 Microsoft Windows Server Message Block Handlers Remote Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/31/2005 10:27:24 PM CAN-2005-0045 9.6 10.0 10.0
12483 Microsoft Windows COM Structured Storage Local Privilege Escalation Vulnerability 5/31/2005 10:31:43 PM CAN-2005-0047 8.0 7.5 10.0
12479 Microsoft Windows Hyperlink Object Library Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 5/31/2005 10:42:31 PM CAN-2005-0057 7.5 8.9 8.0
12095 Microsoft Windows LoadImage API Function Integer Overflow Vulnerability 6/1/2005 7:06:12 PM CAN-2004-1049 8.5 8.3 8.0
12094 Microsoft Windows ANI File Denial of Service Vulnerability 6/1/2005 7:10:14 PM CAN-2004-1305 5.8 6.3 5.0
11950 Microsoft Windows DHTML Edit Control Script Injection Vulnerability 5/31/2005 10:39:58 PM CAN-2004-1319 7.5 6.7 5.0
11467 Microsoft Windows HTML Help Control Cross-Zone Scripting Vulnerability 6/1/2005 8:59:30 PM CAN-2004-1043 8.5 8.3 8.0
19 records found

[Toms-SC]

I work at the City of Calgary, after taking a tour of their million dollar network/server room, most of the 80 servers run off of open BSD or Redhat Enterprise. We currently do have a Solaris rack, but they are being DCed. I feel that there is a reason for this.

Now to throw a wrench into things
Tiger 10.4 > Windows XP Pro > Linux *

/end

[JeremyD]

The City has been talking about switching over to a linux desktop environment for several years now. It will be interesting to see how that turns out.

The city is a pretty good example of what I was talking about before in terms of support calls and training costs. I worked on their service desk for a couple years and there were a large number of how to related calls. There is a large contigent of people that are still not that familiar with basic windows operations or the office apps. But there are a large number of positions where computer use isn't a huge requirement. With a few exceptions the firefighters use it for email and internet. All the mechanics, waterworks, street crews, etc only need computer for a small part of their shift. And then it is often the crew chief that uses it. So there is training requirements or service desk calls when someone moves up the chain of command and has to start using them.

[googe]

a few things...

most, if not all of the windows bugs you posted are part of the base OS. the redhat bugs listed are all 3rd party apps that red hat just provides patches for because theyre in the rpm database, most of which arent even installed by default. the reason slackware has less is because they have less package support, not cause of what it installs by default. so, that comparison is inconclusive.

this though is pretty funny/sad:



13775 Linux Kernel Cryptoloop Information Disclosure Vulnerability 5/27/2005 2:30:26 PM May 26, 2005 4.4
13769 Linux Kernel Local MEMLOCK RLIMIT Bypass Denial Of Service Vulnerability 5/25/2005 9:12:54 PM May 25, 2005 4.1
13709 Linux Kernel Key_User_Lookup() Local Parent Deletion Race Vulnerability 5/24/2005 8:35:52 PM May 23, 2005 4.6
13680 Linux Kernel 64 Bit EXT3 Filesystem Extended Attribute Denial Of Service Vulnerability 5/19/2005 6:05:16 PM May 19, 2005 4.1
13651 Multiple Linux Kernel IOCTL Handlers Local Memory Corruption Vulnerabilities 5/24/2005 8:31:46 PM May 17, 2005 5.8
13589 Linux Kernel ELF Core Dump Local Buffer Overflow Vulnerability 6/3/2005 1:59:09 PM May 11, 2005 7.2
13455 Linux Kernel it87 and via686a Drivers Insecure File Creation Denial of Service Vulnerability 5/24/2005 8:37:22 PM May 02, 2005 6.2
13438 Linux Kernel Itanium System Call Local Denial Of Service Vulnerability 4/29/2005 5:21:32 PM Apr 29, 2005 4.1
13267 Linux Kernel Fib_Seq_Start Local Denial of Service Vulnerability 5/23/2005 3:54:10 PM Apr 19, 2005 4.8
13266 Linux Kernel Unw_Unwind_To_User Local Denial of Service Vulnerability 4/29/2005 5:37:09 PM Apr 19, 2005 4.1
13091 Linux Kernel SYSFS_Write_File Local Integer Overflow Vulnerability 4/19/2005 9:52:15 PM Mar 24, 2005 6
12987 Linux Kernel Asynchronous Input/Output Local Denial Of Service Vulnerability 4/6/2005 8:03:31 PM Apr 04, 2005 5.2
12971 Linux Kernel Serial Driver Local Mouse And Keyboard Event Injection Vulnerability 4/19/2005 9:52:12 PM Jan 28, 2005 5.5
12970 Linux Kernel TmpFS Driver Local Denial Of Service Vulnerability 4/19/2005 9:49:22 PM Apr 01, 2005 4.8
12959 Linux Kernel Futex Local Deadlock Denial Of Service Vulnerability 4/11/2005 2:59:08 PM Mar 31, 2005 4.8


total of 45 since jan 1st *just* in the kernel. plus a couple more unpatched ones, and a few more 'unknown' ones. in all fairness, vulnerability counts are a poor metric of security for a ton of reasons. not defending windows or anything cause i dislike it even more, but the linux kernel really is a mess of garbage :) linux is kind of a "jack of all trades, master of none" i think.

i totally agree with the patching thing though, functional patches for linux bugs are usually out overnight, microsoft takes several months and they almost always break some configurations the first time around. they still havent fixed 2 remote code execution bugs that eeye disclosed last march.

as for how secure a default redhat is these days, i have no idea. i dont use redhat or 'default' installs, i dont think any admin really ever uses a default install.

[redline]

Originally posted by rage2
A few days late, I apologize...

*nix is better than Windows - The argument is getting fucking tiring

Why do people, namely *nix admins that are very anti-Microsoft, still pushing this retarded argument? It's a huge waste of time, a huge waste of productivity, and a burden on our IT infrastructures today. The last few days have been hell for me, basically dealing with an IT department that was very pro *nix, to the point where they believe ANYTHING to do with Microsoft is insecure. I won't go into details, as it's confidential work stuff, but I will say that I will never step foot into India. I like curry, but it's still not worth it.

Lets dig deeper into this &quot;*nix is better than Windows&quot; statement, and why I believe it's fucking stupid. The hardcore *nix admins claim (and believe) that Windows is an insecure mess of an OS. Yes it's true, any Windows OS (except the recently released Windows XP w/integrated SP2), when you install it by default and slap it on the internet, chances are, you'll get compromised. I'll give them that. But this ALSO holds true for many default installations of *nix OS's. Some sort of a vulnerability exist with most default installations, that's why you do NOT use default installations. Well, smart admins don't anyways.

What the *nix admins will not admit to is that Windows, like any other OS, CAN be secured, otherwise, I'd be unemployed today. If you're smart about it, you don't even need to patch immediately when something gets discovered. I don't do it on my servers, even the ones sitting on the internet, because we're not going to take a server down on Microsoft's patch schedule. I've taken great precautions to ensure that only essential services are running and/or exposed, and made sure that those services do not have a chance to be exploited by restricting various parameters (especially with IIS web server). Guess what? *nix admins do the same thing with their OS's and services, but I don't fucking know why they can't grasp the concept that THE EXACT SAME THING CAN BE APPLIED TO WINDOWS. Just because it's made by Microsoft? Who knows, I'll never understand 'em. Maybe that's why those guys don't get laid.

Why is Windows getting such a bad security rap? Well, the media has a lot to do with it. It's much more interesting to bash a successful company than it is to bash a bunch of guys on pure cheetos and coca-cola diets. That's what the media does. That's why we know everything about Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston, they're popular. Do you know who Pauly Shore is dating? No, because nobody gives a shit, so it's not reported. Another reason is that Windows is such a popular OS, pretty much a monopoly on the market. Pulling up my logs for yesterday's traffic, Microsoft OS's account for a staggering 96.3% of all traffic hitting beyond. Mac trails second at 3.1%, and *nix variants are a measly 0.6%. Now, as a virus writer, or someone looking to hunt for vulnerabilities for my gain, why would I go after 0.6% of the machines out there, when the chances of finding an insecure machine is much higher when I can target 96.3% of the machines out there? Back before Windows was a popular server OS, there were next to NO vulnerabilities for windows. There were a few annoyances to end users (remember the good old Ping of Death?) but all the attacks were on *nix systems. Rooted boxes on the net causing waves of denial of service attacks. The good old days. You never saw the Windows guys make fun of *nix now did you??? I don't get it.

With that, you may wonder, why do I choose Windows over *nix? I used to run several slackware linux boxes at work. They were secure, ran well, used very little hardware. Why the switch to Windows if it's so targetted, and so bad security wise? In my case, it's productivity. I'm good enough to know how to secure both OS's, but when it comes to doing day to day work, I'm a LOT faster working with Windows. It's a nifty concept called &quot;Ease of Use&quot;. Granted, I was never a top level *nix expert, I knew enough to secure my servers, and to get things done. With windows OS's, learning new OS's, new services, very easy to do. Takes very little time to learn the basics, how to get around and get things done. As 1 person, I can manage 100 windows servers with the same amount of effort as managing 30 *nix servers. When I hire IT help, I don't have to hire guys with 10 years of *nix experience (which still doesn't guarantee shit), I can hire guys out of college, low salary, and they will do as good a job as guys with 5 years experience. Makes a lot of business sense.

Ease of Use. This is the secret behind many businesses, including Microsoft. This is why such a &quot;bad OS&quot; can have such a HUGE market dominance. Sure, they're accused of using their monopoly to strenthen their market dominance, but remember, they didn't start out as a monopoly. They got there through Ease of Use. Why's beyond so successful? Same theory. We simplified many of the tough tasks, made life easy for our users, that's why you guys are here. Look at how BMW is struggling with their new i-drive system. Not everyone is a geek/rocket scientist. Not everyone will want to (or can) learn how to turn on the AC by navigating through 2 levels of menus, when a simple button will suffice. There's some business advice for you guys out there.

So please... if you're an anal *nix admin, all I ask is give Windows a try, or at least be OPEN to someone that wants network interoperability with Windows, instead of slamming them and refusing to do anything they say just because they're using a Microsoft product. 96.3% of us are begging you to help us get BOTH our jobs done.

Thank you.

the only thing i would not do on Windows is Oracle

[redline]

Originally posted by benyl
From a Enterprise perspective, you can't deny that 80% of the market is running Unix/Aix/Sun Solaris. That is just the Enterprise standard.


(

not even close, i was in encana server room the other month and it was 90% windows 10% unix.

[redline]

Originally posted by Xtrema
Amount of stuff you can script in *nix ownz windows.

And Linux is free, you can get away with a lot of network funtinalities with it without paying MS a penny (in small scope anyway)..

not even close again, NO company that i know will bank there business on free linux. And if you have seen what Red Hat charges for there products it is anything but free.

[redline]

Originally posted by speedracer



But I think in Alberta you will find the ratio of *nix servers to be overwhelming. Damn telecos and oil and gas industry ;)




I am manager of IT in a oil and gas company the ratio of windows to unix is about 90% windows and there more windows ever day and less unix...

[redline]

Originally posted by Tyler883
Yup, my employer implemented both Windows and Linux servers to meet their needs, too.

Appearantly, their needs included a server that likes to crash every once in awhile, so the got the windows server for that need.

The linux server didn't meet their needs very well, because it has NEVER crashed.

maybe your company should hire rage2 as it server admin or someone else that know what they are doing...

I know it is tough to get a Linux box to crash cause nothing runs on it!

[redline]

Originally posted by rage2

Actually, I moved it to a linux box, and the same problems are happening. MySQL is a funny database... yes it's FAST, when you're using myisam tables. That's because there's nothing, no proper locking, no transactions, nothing. Look at all the corruption you see here alone. Random threads with no posts, random db errors, non updated post counts.

OK, so if I want proper DB stuff, I'd have to use InnoDB tables. And guess what? It's slow as hell when you make MySQL act close to a real database. Drives me insane.

If only I was an oracle expert, I'd port to oracle, and not MS SQL.

Mysql is for nerds in there basement not corporation, it has been proven many time that it can not handle large amounts of data.

wait for SQL2005 that product is going to kick ass.

[atomic]

Originally posted by Toms-SC
I work at the City of Calgary, after taking a tour of their million dollar network/server room, most of the 80 servers run off of open BSD or Redhat Enterprise. We currently do have a Solaris rack, but they are being DCed. I feel that there is a reason for this.

Now to throw a wrench into things
Tiger 10.4 &gt; Windows XP Pro &gt; Linux *

/end

only a million dollars? ;) good to see our tax money is good at work and someone is obvoiusly making a lot of money selling crap to the city to let firefighters check email. :rolleyes:

and to think all googe and i are doing is protecting OS's from their own holes :angel: .. can't complain though, poor programming and devry keep us employed :) ... actually not all comp sci

Redline, you must be a kickass Exchange administrator heh! but maybe start putting all your replies in one message :) .. and i can't agree that sql2005 is gonna be that great . based apon MS's release history :P . although i'm sure by SP2 it will be acceptable for corporate use!

[googe]

Originally posted by redline
not even close again, NO company that i know will bank there business on free linux.

you dont know many companies then, cause i can name several off the top of my head.


Originally posted by redline

And if you have seen what Red Hat charges for there products it is anything but free.


they charge $0 for their product, which is free. they do charge for support, however.



Originally posted by redline


maybe your company should hire rage2 as it server admin or someone else that know what they are doing...

I know it is tough to get a Linux box to crash

no, its super easy actually if you try to intentionally


Originally posted by redline


cause nothing runs on it!

nothing runs on linux? maybe when youre a poor Microsoft Certified Solitaire Engineer (MCSE) and cant run a simple install script. :dunno:

[atomic]

Originally posted by googe
nothing runs on linux? maybe when youre a poor Microsoft Certified Solitaire Engineer (MCSE) and cant run a simple install script. :dunno: [/B]

install script? oh you mean setup.exe! next .. next .. next ... next I AGREE .. next .. next .. next ... FINISH

didn't u know . the only apps available for linux is VI and PING which makes it a great network diagnosing tool!

but now that windows 95 includes a native winsock interface, it's put my unix knowledge to waste :( . damn you windows 95!!! how can i feed my children if everyone can PING!? no one will hire a used up old PINGER like me

[speedracer]

Originally posted by redline


I am manager of IT in a oil and gas company the ratio of windows to unix is about 90% windows and there more windows ever day and less unix...

That just a moot point of just one example. I'm not sure what you mean by everyday? In terms of the end user - I agree there are more Window boxes running.

But as a core enterprise server I just don't see that. Windows is just not that flexible. I have yet to see racks of windows boxs control switching...

As for Encana you must not have clearence access as the data rooms are UNIX servers. ;)

[atomic]

Originally posted by speedracer


That just a moot point of just one example. I'm not sure what you mean by everyday? In terms of the end user - I agree there are more Window boxes running.

But as a core enterprise server I just don't see that. Windows is just not that flexible. I have yet to see racks of windows boxs control switching...



haha that's also because more and more companies need email and web servers and keep hiring devry grads . which is good, why would i give my mom unix? haha i wouldn't even trust her with a mac!

let the companies who REQUIRE unix to keep using unix. and let all you windows people contiue checking email, quering little database and running ADAWARE as a scheduled maintenance :P

unix will continue to thrive for it's proper use and if don't understand what that is... then this discussion isn't for u :P

[googe]

Originally posted by atomic


haha that's also because more and more companies need email and web servers and keep hiring devry grads . which is good, why would i give my mom unix? haha i wouldn't even trust her with a mac!

let the companies who REQUIRE unix to keep using unix. and let all you windows people contiue checking email, quering little database and running ADAWARE as a scheduled maintenance :P

unix will continue to thrive for it's proper use and if don't understand what that is... then this discussion isn't for u :P

$ ./ZONEALARM.EXE
-bash: ./ZONEALARM.EXE: cannot execute binary file

$ ./ADAWARE.EXE
-bash: ./ADAWARE.EXE: cannot execute binary file

$ ./MYPIC!!!!11one!1.JPG.BAT.COM.SHS.VBS.EXE
-bash: !1: event not found

WTF DOESNT ANYTHING RUN? :banghead: :cry:


on another note

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://www.encana.com



Site http://www.encana.com Last reboot 258 days ago
Alberta Energy Company Limited Calgary AB CA 142.56.1.151 Solaris 8 Netscape-Enterprise/4.1 11-Oct-2003
Alberta Energy Company Limited Calgary AB CA 142.56.1.117 Solaris 8 Netscape-Enterprise/4.1 28-Jun-2002


hmm and their mail server


Connected to mxlogic40.encana.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 p00m167.mxlogic.net ESMTP mxl_mta-2.9.0-24p5 [835201968.352471]; Fri, 03 Jun 2005 11:43:56 -0600 (MDT); NO UCE, INBOUND


more unix? :dunno:

[atomic]

/start
l0lll3rsk4t3z!!!!oneone!!111 googe!!! 1333737337
/me laughs!!!
/join #windows
/say #windows How do i use winnuke.exe?

HAHA check this loser out that I H4x0r3d @ 127.0.0.1!!!! HAHA 0wn3d that IP!
/end
http://www.netrite.ca/robodeath/rofl%20waffle.jpg

[rage2]

Originally posted by atomic
haha that's also because more and more companies need email and web servers and keep hiring devry grads . which is good, why would i give my mom unix? haha i wouldn't even trust her with a mac!
If you're implying that Devry grads dunno unix and only knows windows, you're seriously wrong. They don't even know windows :rofl:. We turn away so many devry grads it's not even funny.


Originally posted by atomic
let the companies who REQUIRE unix to keep using unix. and let all you windows people contiue checking email, quering little database and running ADAWARE as a scheduled maintenance :P
BTW - the point of my rant was comments like this... guys that don't have an open mind about Windows ;). I'd brag about our beyond setup (running mostly windows, mySQL on slackware), but mySQL is being a PITA, so I can't really brag till I get the problem fixed.

[atomic]

Originally posted by rage2

BTW - the point of my rant was comments like this... guys that don't have an open mind about Windows ;). I'd brag about our beyond setup (running mostly windows, mySQL on slackware), but mySQL is being a PITA, so I can't really brag till I get the problem fixed.

sorry, this proves my point . YOU have to have an open mind and understand why unix IS an advantage in specific situations . I'm more then aware of Windows capability . we have almost 50/50 and I use windows 50/50 as i use Linux 50/50 . each are used for their own benefits.

details of this fact would require me to write a book and i'm quite certain some slashdot loving geek has already reaked the benefits from writing one on this subject :) . hopefully it's right :P and applicable to this world

[googe]

Originally posted by rage2

If you're implying that Devry grads dunno unix and only knows windows, you're seriously wrong. They don't even know windows :rofl:. We turn away so many devry grads it's not even funny.

getting off topic (as if we werent already) but im just curious, do you get turned off of them instantly when you see devry, or do you just consistently notice they all end up being incompetent? that school seems to have a bad reputation

[redline]

Originally posted by googe


you dont know many companies then, cause i can name several off the top of my head.


can you let me who they are so i can not invest in them



they charge $0 for their product, which is free. they do charge for support, however.

who the hell wants to run a enterprise class server without support?

and red hat has stop free downloads of there lastest OS's

[JeremyD]

Originally posted by rage2
[B]
If you're implying that Devry grads dunno unix and only knows windows, you're seriously wrong. They don't even know windows :rofl:. We turn away so many devry grads it's not even funny.


Are there any tech schools that actually train their students properly? Very few people that come directly from school are able to operate let alone support basic computer systems.

[sputnik]

Our business runs...

40% AIX (IBM p-Series RS/6000 Servers). These are our Trading System and Oracle Servers. I am sure we would be running Linux had it been out when we started development of our software.

30% Redhat Enterprise (IBM x-Series Servers). Web and reporting servers.

30% Windows 2000 Server (IBM x-Series Servers). These are for internal office crap.

At the end of the day there are TONS of different reasons why a company will pick one OS over another. Often its something as simple as they just picked the OS that the initial systems administrator was most comfortable with, or they use the OS that their application was developed under.

Some may look at our AIX servers and say that we should be running Linux because its cheaper and supports better hardware. But at the end of the day we dont care to take a risk in migration just to save a couple grand, and AIX has been rock solid for us for over 10 years and there is little reason to change at this point.

Also, when comparing which OS is more secure they ALL are insecure and can be broken in one way or another. No matter how secure you think your servers are, there will come a day when they will be vulnerable. The key to security is to have a secure perimeter (as good as possible), a well built DMZ (with a second secure perimeter) and properly configured intrusion detection systems to monitor any suspicious activity. While you are doing all of this, keep the server updates up to date and hope for the best. Nothing will be 100% perfect, but there are certainly enough ways to keep your network secure that will make the selection of your OS rather trivial (from a security standpoint anyways).

[atomic]

Are there any tech schools that actually train their students properly? Very few people that come directly from school are able to operate let alone support basic computer systems.
.......
.......
getting off topic (as if we werent already) but im just curious, do you get turned off of them instantly when you see devry, or do you just consistently notice they all end up being incompetent? that school seems to have a bad reputation


It's not that the schools may actually be that bad in teaching . It's that they give a "diploma" (or a trendy dated dot com equilevant) to every student who's tuition cheque clears.



Also, when comparing which OS is more secure they ALL are insecure and can be broken in one way or another. No matter how secure you think your servers are, there will come a day when they will be vulnerable.


i this security is definetly important when rating the OS BUT let's not leave out the OS specific benefits of ...
- OEM Hardware integration vs Custom Hardware
- Availability of exposed OS layers of drivers, code and interfaces
- Ease of use for application
- Maintenance
- Hardware cost
man i'm bored of typing this list because it goes on for ever. There are SO many reason of why you'd chose either! POINT IS, there ARE benefits to using either for specific reasons defined by the requirements of your application! which is why this entire topic needs to be dropped to the lowest priority of anyones concern.



Originally posted by sputnik
keep the server updates up to date and hope for the best. Nothing will be 100% perfect,

you're fired!

[rage2]

Originally posted by atomic
sorry, this proves my point . YOU have to have an open mind and understand why unix IS an advantage in specific situations . I'm more then aware of Windows capability . we have almost 50/50 and I use windows 50/50 as i use Linux 50/50 . each are used for their own benefits.
I do have an open mind about unix. All my servers used to be linux based. Re-read my first post to see what I was ranting about... I still have *nix boxes for tasks where it works better than windows. We choose windows more often than *nix because it saves our company money.

Your comment about windows only querying small databases, doing email, running adaware implies that windows is useless. In fact, Microsoft sucks as an email server... *ahem* EXCHANGE! :rofl:

Originally posted by googe
getting off topic (as if we werent already) but im just curious, do you get turned off of them instantly when you see devry, or do you just consistently notice they all end up being incompetent? that school seems to have a bad reputation
Consistency thing. We've hired and fired many Devry grads over the years. If they have Devry on their resume, they better have some amazing experience to back it up!

[atomic]

Originally posted by rage2

Your comment about windows only querying small databases, doing email, running adaware implies that windows is useless. In fact, Microsoft sucks as an email server... *ahem* EXCHANGE! :rofl:


i think the average level of overall technical understanding has been simplified by the mouse cursor and control panel. i'm speaking on behalf of simplicity for situations in which using MS Exchange is THE requirement.

I belittle windows (while understanding it's capabilities) because my humurous comments reflect it's average use.

[redline]

Originally posted by sputnik


Some may look at our AIX servers and say that we should be running Linux because its cheaper and supports better hardware. But at the end of the day we dont care to take a risk in migration just to save a couple grand, and AIX has been rock solid for us for over 10 years and there is little reason to change at this point.




Linux is not all that it is cracked up to be, it took us months of tuning to get our linux/oracle 9i rac with twice the resources as our Sun box to out performance it. This was after Oracle and Red Hat sent in their experts to help us out. Which was not a lot of help.

And after demo a new p5 AIX box we are moving our Oracle to AIX cause it kicks ass on everything.

I think linux has a good future but they are still lacking in the support arena compared to both unix or windows. Plus it lacks management tools compared to the other two.

Windows biggest problem is that there are too many assclowns with a windows CD think they are experts and people buy into that line of BS.

On the Exchange note, we never have a problem with our exchange server!

[Tyler883]

I'm a typical dreamer that hopes to start a small business from the ground up, and I need solutions that are best for me - now and in the future.

A million dollar solution doesn't cut it for me.

Heck, even Microsoft's cost per workstation seat is too much.

My point is, I think a linux/mysql is a reasonable - and somewhat wise - choice for what I'm trying to do. And, I'm convinced that spending big bucks on microsoft software, and running Access until I can afford something better is f#cken stupid. Worse yet, maybe someone here wants to suggest that I use spreadsheets until I can afford something better than mysql?

Sorry, I'm not buying it ( quite literally :rofl: )

[ehos]

Anyone actually buy Microsoft licences? :rolleyes:

[rage2]

Originally posted by Tyler883
I'm a typical dreamer that hopes to start a small business from the ground up, and I need solutions that are best for me - now and in the future.
I suggest some more research.

Originally posted by Tyler883
A million dollar solution doesn't cut it for me.

Heck, even Microsoft's cost per workstation seat is too much.
There's TONS of Microsoft programs you can join that gets you licenses for next to nothing. MCSP (especially gold) will get you shitloads of licenses for internal use with very minimal costs. Check out the gold Cert Partner licenses you get when you join:

https://partner.microsoft.com/global/program/levels/goldcertpartner/40013373

We're a multimillion dollar company that pays next to nothing to have software for close to 100 employees. It's amazing how much money you can save by doing simple research on what's out there. I know small companies that buy MS products RETAIL for their staff. Crazy mofus.

Originally posted by Tyler883
My point is, I think a linux/mysql is a reasonable - and somewhat wise - choice for what I'm trying to do. And, I'm convinced that spending big bucks on microsoft software, and running Access until I can afford something better is f#cken stupid. Worse yet, maybe someone here wants to suggest that I use spreadsheets until I can afford something better than mysql?
MSDE is free, stripped down version of Microsoft SQL server. We deploy this for clients that can't afford SQL server but what the reliability and performance of SQL server for free. People still use access in production? :dunno:

http://www.microsoft.com/sql/msde/default.asp

I suggest you look into it, mySQL is not a REAL database. If you want me to explain, I can go on and on and on lol. If you wanna go free, MSDE. If you want to go free and open source because you hate Microsoft, PostgreSQL.

[Tyler883]

Originally posted by rage2

I suggest you look into it, mySQL is not a REAL database. If you want me to explain, I can go on and on and on lol. If you wanna go free, MSDE. If you want to go free and open source because you hate Microsoft, PostgreSQL.

thanks for the links

Can you give me one or two reasons, and keep it close to laymen's terms? I do know that the latest mysql offers the ability to do sub queries for the first time.

( my electronics background makes it difficult to keep up )

[rage2]

Originally posted by Tyler883
thanks for the links

Can you give me one or two reasons, and keep it close to laymen's terms? I do know that the latest mysql offers the ability to do sub queries for the first time.

( my electronics background makes it difficult to keep up )
A good rant, which is outdated, but most of the stuff does still apply.

http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node=MySQL

To add to the rant, use of InnoDB tables slows things down a LOT. I've tried. And to get transactional support, you need to use InnoDB, plus I have to recode a bunch of vbulletin stuff.

MySQL got a lot of people interested when they released a benchmark when 4.0 came out with their new caching system. Hell, even our CEO wanted us to port our app to mySQL :rofl:. The benchmark showed that it performed better than MS SQL, and close to Oracle. Too bad to perform like that, there's no transactions. Can you say data corruption? Look at all the bizarre lost data on beyond (random threads with no posts, missing avatars) and you'll know what I mean. The power of marketing ;).

When there's corruption, it can get so bad if unchecked over long periods of time, that it's next to impossible to recover. 780tuners used to run phpBB I believe, when Mark approached me to try and fix their corrupted database about a year or so ago. Their mySQL database was so far gone that it took me an entire weekend to get it into a usable state. From there, phpBB wouldn't even recognize the db properly, php errors everywhere. No transactions. No logging. No rolling back. Eventually, I had to manually export all the data to a vbulletin database (I'm more familiar with vbulletin code) to get it usable. That's why they changed to vbulletin hehe.

If you're not doing anything mission critical, mySQL is nice I guess. Just have fun porting it to something else when you NEED mission critical stuff, as well as performance to go along with it.

[Tyler883]

"If you're not doing anything mission critical, mySQL is nice I guess. Just have fun porting it to something else when you NEED mission critical stuff, as well as performance to go along with it." Rage2

I want a database driven website that has a shopping cart and other basic stuff, ...the online store that lacks the marketing and planning to make the riches that other stores might make.....
thats it.

I've always asumed that mysql would handle this,

and the system could easily be re-done by someone that knows what they are doing if I started to see some decent sales volume,

but realistically my website might serve a home business that never goes anywhere...

...most home businesses never do anything worth mentioning other than teaching the owner a few valuable lessons....

...thats probably my case, too.

[Charon]

I work as a Programmer/ DB Admin and Server Admin for a small company doing research.
I used to run servers on Windows tried out a benchmark and windows went down hard. Its memory management for threaded applications is terrible.
Running the same setup on Linux under the same benchmark on the same hardware. And it worked like a charm.

You can customize the linux kernel for performance as well. If you have an application using lots of system calls. This can be built into the kernel to avoid having the cpu switch context over and over again.
You cannot do this kind of performance optimization within windows.
Also in open source you have hundreds if not thousands of people checking over everyone elses code.

Where is the console only version of windows XP? Why do I need a GUI enviroment eating resources ? Everything I would like to do in windows is available in linux sooner, better and I can do what I want with it.

I do use windows for a desktop enviroment but NEVER as a server. And I run it as a desktop env because I have to test with IE.

/its late, ill have to fix any typo's or half formed comments later