__/ [ John Bokma ] on Saturday 22 April 2006 18:42 \__
> Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> __/ [ John Bokma ] on Saturday 22 April 2006 05:57 \__
>>> That's like saying that a Linux user can edit .bashrc in his/her home
>>> directory ;-)
>> With respect, in order for this to happen you would need to get a
>> non-trustable script, change its permissions to executable and then
>> run it.
> Weird, I can just do vi .bashrc
For this, you would need to open a command line (if it is available from the
menus despite the rarity of its requirement nowadays) and start entering
commands to edit a hidden file. Then, you need to know how to save files in
vi, which most people will find difficult. Why not become self-destructive
and just erase personal files such as Documents? The effect of changing
.bashrc is not very detrimental.
>> Changes made could be irreversible. But compare that with
>> Windows where merely viewing a directory in thumbnail mode (WMF)
> Similar bugs have been in Linux libraries, and you can be quite sure
> there are more to be found.
> The main thing is: it hasn't happened with me, I use XP a lot. Why is
> that? Is it maybe that I am at the same "level" as a lot (maybe a
> majority) of the *nix users?
>> opening your E-mail client to receive an E-mail can lead to disaster.
> You think that people who are able to save an attachement, open a zip
> with a password supplied in the email, and then execute the file are
> going to be stopped on Linux?
> Moreover, you think that if enough people want to be able to run a
> program directly from an attachement it will not happen?
I was thinking along the lines of HTML E-mail with malicious scripts.
>> It's no secret that everyone seeks reassurance for their chances, O/S
>> included. In this day and age, you don't have to be a developer in
>> order for computers to take up a large portion of your life. To some,
>> Windows is the only choice which is taken for granted, Linux bashing
>> is often good for nothing but leaving an open door to the ego fairy.
> You then misread my comments, I am not Linux bashing, but I know that
> Linux is not going to happen because some fan boys are ignorant about
> Windows and the "average" user.
Have you seen Ubuntu yet? [kind tone of voice /] I know you are teaching
Debian at some capacity, so why not explore the Live CD? Something tells me
you have done so already.
> I doubt if Linux will ever gain over 50% of the desktops installed. I
> think the most important question is: *why* should it get 50% (or more).
When Linux snatches a majority of all desktop machines (it grows in double
digit numbers per quarter in the servers market) it will look and behave
differently from what it presently does... which is not bad by the way...
http://www.youtube.com/v/-CgqWlX_GsI (Streaming Flash)
> I don't like, for example, how the Linux desktop becomes more and more a
> clone of Windows (or worse: a mix of several desktops combined in a bad
> thought out way IMO).
> I consider the user interface of OOo a horror in many places for another
> Anyway, personally I think Apple is doing a better job, and wouldn't
> amaze me if they pull off what Linux zealots for some reason want to
> happen for 10+ years by now.
We shall live and see. Just remember the factors of affordability and
openness, which more and more people come to appreciate as a necessity.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Quote when replying in non-real-time dialogues"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
2:25am up 11:22, 9 users, load average: 0.60, 0.50, 0.43
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms