[aclug-L] Re: Linux as an alternative to a Windows desktop

[Nate Bargmann <n0nb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

* Jonathan Hall <flimzy@xxxxxxxxxx> [2002 Dec 13 06:05 -0600]:
> 
> If all you're doing is email and web browsing, that's probably true.

And isn't that what the majority of home computers are used for these
days?

> As soon as someone wants to install the latest screen saver, or chat
> program, or whatever the latest gadget is... Linux is worlds harder,
> sometimes impossible (without root access) for a new user than Windows is.

In a corporate environment with proper administration these actions can
and probably should be locked out in Win NT+ as well.  I know that my
company has largely done so, although there are holes in the security
policy that have been found and exploited on the local desktops.  And 
therein lies the rub and why *NIX types systems are generally considered 
more secure by default than their Win counterparts.  Each requires 
considerable work to be truly "secure", but Win* seems to trade security
for "convenience" in most cases.

As for Linux being "worlds harder" I think it again comes back to
training and education.  My brother uses a Linux system that I built.
Does he maintain it?  No.  He "uses" it and I've had to talk him through
a couple of things over the phone, but overall it does what he wants
which is Internet access.  He had never used a Win machine (or anything
else for that matter) before so he didn't have a bias of how the world 
"should be" when he started using that box.  Also, he and I don't have 
to worry about rogue websites or email "upgrading" his box either.

OTOH, while root access is required in a *NIX environment for software
acessable system wide, pretty much every user app will support (some
better than others) installation confined to a single user's directory
(not through the distro's package management system, however).  So, if
KDE allows it, a user can install a screen saver in her home directory.
OTOH, I prefer Xscreensaver.

On this machine I've never gotten around to installing Mozilla under
/usr/local and have always installed it in my home directory.  Since I'm
the only user it doesn't matter, but it works just as happily as if it
had been installed in the default location.

Some programs are just braindead and won't work unless installed under
/usr/local, but then those programs generally aren't a good choice for
Ned Novice either.

As the advantages become more widely understood, I think Linux systems
have a bright future on the corporate desktop.  I don't particullarly
care about the home desktops as they will eventually follow the
corporate "standard" by default.

World Domination (TM) in progress!

- Nate >>

-- 
 Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB          | "We have awakened a
 Internet | n0nb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx               | sleeping giant and
 Location | Bremen, Kansas USA EM19ov           | have instilled in him
  Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @  | a terrible resolve".
             http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/           | - Admiral Yamamoto
-- This is the discussion@xxxxxxxxx list.  To unsubscribe,
visit http://www.complete.org/cgi-bin/listargate-aclug.cgi