Windows VS. Linux - Anyone use SliTaz?

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by sixswornsermon
reply to post by GmoS719
 


Any GUI front end for IPtables would do it.

You should have IPtables installed - check with $sudo iptables -L .

This will give you the listing of all current firewall rules.




Yeah, that's what I'm using.
The default configuration is ok.




posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 


It more than likely is ok.

You may want to disable any running servers that are not necessary, and close their ports on the firewall for max paranoia.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Why did this thread die?

The one time I have time to play......



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 

Hello, fellow Linux Hobbyist! I was not even aware of SliTaz but quickly found it at DistroWatch.
I am a long time Linux user, in fact, XP was just new when I first installed
Ubuntu,
the first publicly released version (4.10) was released in October of 2004. I have been a Linux user ever since. For a long time, I was a Linux "Distro Hopper". This is a person who is always on the hunt for a better, faster, more secure Linux Platform to run. I finally settled on PCLinuxOS, and ran their MiniMe version since the 2008 release. I had by this time discovered Fedora, the pretty Lady with the red hat and blue dress. This was when Fedora 6 came out. I had to wait and save up for a bigger hard drive so I could install Fedora, in those days it was 6 CDs that had to be installed, one at a time.

Today, and five computer builds under my belt, I am now running a custom built ultra fast computer, latest Asus MB, Nvidia Chuipset and South Bridge, AMD with the newest version of Fedora, Fedora 17 Beta KDE 86_64, cutting edge technology. I love Computers! Thanks for this thread!

As far as Windows XP is concerned, and I repair and work on computers for a partial living, XP is the best of all of the Windows OS. I still get requests for an XP install, a lot of people here in the Appalachian Mountains still have dial up, cable and DSL nowhere near them yet. But, sadly, Microsoft is ending support for XP, and probably Vista too.

Support is ending for some versions of Windows

Support for Windows XP is ending on April 8, 2014.

Support for Windows Vista Service Pack 1 (SP1) ended on July 12, 2011.

Support for Windows XP with Service Pack 2 (SP2) ended on July 13, 2010.

If you're running one of these versions after support ends, you won't get security updates for Windows.
source
Truthfully, I have had a lot of people bring be practically new computers, E-Machines, Dells, and HPs, with a factory install of Windows 7, and instruct me to downgrade back to Vista, or even XP. My own wife bought a new Toshiba Laptop, and on the first day, before she even turned it on, we erased the drive and install Linux on it.
edit on 5/11/12 by autowrench because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:07 PM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 

I've heard about fedora but have never checked it out.
I'll take a look.
SliTaz is pretty amazing for it's size.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of windows, but I have to agree that xp is the best.
edit on 11-5-2012 by GmoS719 because: (no reason given)


Thanks for the links by the way, I wasn't sure if I was able to post them.
edit on 11-5-2012 by GmoS719 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by sixswornsermon
reply to post by GmoS719
 


It more than likely is ok.

You may want to disable any running servers that are not necessary, and close their ports on the firewall for max paranoia.


What about a proxy.
I read good reviews about privoxy, but i'm not too sure.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 


Don't know. Never use them. Will slow down your browsing.

What are you doing that you need proxies for?



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by sixswornsermon
reply to post by GmoS719
 


Don't know. Never use them. Will slow down your browsing.

What are you doing that you need proxies for?


LOL
I don't necessary need them. I just thought they might come in handy if I wanted
to check out piratebay or something. IDK.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 


Looks like Privoxy is more geared towards filtering. Perhaps using it on a server in your LAN to filter junk for the other LAN clients. I used to do something on the single PC level with a program called Proxomitron. It also allowed usages of remote hosts with support for socks5 and switching proxies at user defined intervals.

I think what you need is a proper paid VPN service. Preferably one that does not keep their logs.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by sixswornsermon
 

Yeah, I think I'll just skip piratebay, seems more trouble than it's worth.
I am interested in BackTrack though...
How do you have yours setup?
Would it do me any good to install it along side my distro?



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by GmoS719
 


Well, you can run it as a live distro. Works well that way. Of course, you cannot make changes and expect them to remain after the next reboot.

I have mine installed as the only OS on an old laptop. I don't use it for web browsing or anything like that, so I am not concerned that it is running as root.



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
[ I originally wrote this as an explanatory reply to an earlier post, but it got a little out of hand so I made a separate post of it. However, the wording is still explanatory - it doesn't implicate any ignorance on your behalf!
]


I've been using Debian for both personal computers and servers for over 12 years. I've never felt the need to experiment with different distributions*, but did tinker a lot with kernel configuration in the past. Due to the nature of my work I also need to have access to the dominating OS - so I have Windows 7 on a laptop (dual boot with Debian, of course). I have to say, Windows 7 is a breeze compared to Windows Vista - much like Windows XP was to Windows ME; if I took the time to configure it properly it might come close to annoying me as little as any Debian install I've ever had.

On that note, I find that much of the stereotypes about Linux distributions are somewhat true, but - as are all stereotypes - terribly one-sided. For instance, the notion that you need to do more tinkering to get things right. For some things like getting really new hardware to work, that's often true. But in another sense, it is exactly the other way around. For instance, most distro's come with a blessed repository, holding - for most of us - all the free software we'd ever want. This means you do not have to scour sites to find a program that does what you need it to do, and then have to decide whether you trust the source; instead, you can search through the entire repository on keywords, and choose the packages you like - which are then installed for you. In my opinion it's not just the Linux kernel and distribution software itself that make Linux distro's more secure, but also the vastly differing method of software acquisition. It's so easy on Windows to download software from the wrong source and 'contract' a virus - because you have to go out looking for it, and there are so many spoofs!

The logistical and technical aspects of GNU/Linux distributions are not all that made me a fan though; perhaps moreso, it's the fact that it is mostly community-driven from kernel to software-filled OS. There's no single huge company responsible for what runs your computer; it's thousands of volunteers and a few generous companies believing that people should not have to pay to use their software, and you can join the discussion. The non-central approach does give rise to some 'problems' such as having dozens of packages doing the same thing instead of developers combining their powers, but the innovation and development is so much more organic. Most project developers are constantly in contact with users & other developers in public, through bug reports, forums, IRC, and mailing lists. And this is just the architecture that follows from the software and distribution development being community-driven / non-central.

As most packages in repositories are also open source, their respective projects are often subject to an organic development as well. Most larger projects have different trees, developmental variations on the 'standard' package. Often enough those trees are started by people who are not related to the project at all, but just happened to have an idea; combining that idea with open source software is unfathomably easier than landing a job after solliciting for it at a proprietary software developer (Microsoft, Adobe, etc.) just because you have a great idea. Of course there is again the downside of a non-central approach, and there are plenty projects out there ruled by a central iron fist despite the fact that they are free and open source, but great ideas have their way of gaining support and traction. Simply the fact that a project is open source means that anyone can at least express their ideas in their full form; to see such ideas originate in the depth of the minds of individuals and blossom into major changes o projects is wonderful. I think I could go as far as to say that the free and open source world is partly responsible for my belief in the good of humanity; it's easy to see how much we can accomplish together without the promise of direct societal or monetary gain to central individuals.


* So I'm not familiar with SliTaz.. But I'm sure you don't mind if I went on and on and on and on ;]



posted on May, 11 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by PhoenixOD
 



Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Im an avid gamer do all new 3d games work on Linux?


No. Such a concrete answer might be a bit too bold, but as there are very few companies that release games for Linux, one needs to 'emulate' Windows somehow - for example through the package called Wine - and new games sometimes use parts of Windows so new or obscure that the emulation thereof has not yet been developed. Then there are nastifications like PunkBuster; PB makes a 'signature' of the files on your system and compares it to known Windows signatures; however, when running PB through Wine, it makes a signature of Wine files. Those are not known to PB. Simply put, you cannot join PB servers in multiplayer games using the signature check
. Some have suggested that PB should just accept Wine fingerprints, but I don't think that's going to happen. I agree with sixswornsermon's suggestion to keep Windows on the side (dual boot is a good option).

It would be unfair though to mention how many games do work. I'm particularly fan of the C&C, Red Alert, Warcraft (the RTS's, not WoW), StarCraft, Quake, and Half-Life series. All of those work. In fact, most games from these developers work, with exception to EA. If a previous similar product from the same developer works well chances are that the new game will work as well. For me this was most recently the case with Portal 2.

The developers of Wine have set up an Wine AppDB where information is gathered from the community how well software runs. Usually anything you need to do before it works well is also described on those pages.



Can you just install them and go or do you have to do all sorts of complex messing about trying to emulate Windows and Direct X which 90% of games use?


For most of the games that are rated Gold or Platinum on the WineHQ AppDB, you don't have to do anything remotely complex. Sometimes you can just install away. Sometimes it takes a little bit of tinkering as described on the WineHQ page, most of which can be done with the 'tinkering tool' called winetricks. However, there are definitely features missing; for example, DirectX 10 is - last time I checked - nowhere near a usable state. So for any game that can use both DirectX 10 and DirectX 9, Wine will just use DirectX 9; but for the 1 in a 100 games like Just Cause 2 that can only use DirectX 10, there's no tinkering that will help you run it apart from developing Wine itself.



Are there always Linux drivers for all hardware that works with windows?


No. As sixswornsermon said, some companies flat out refuse to provide software in binaries or source code. For some of the hardware of those companies, Linux developers can retro-engineer drivers, but some chips remain driverless. For some hardware one can use Windows drivers through a package called ndiswrapper. In Linux's case it is always a good idea to check whether hardware is going to work before buying it. I guess this remains a big issue. Yet, some companies do work closely with Linux, such as Intel, nVidia, and AMD; most of their products work fine on Linux. It's the smaller companies that refuse such efforts, such as the producer of tuner chip Micronas DRX-K which is used in some USB TV products.



Does linux come with professional technical support or do you have to be a semi expert and wade through forum posts to find answers?


Linux itself is just the name of the kernel, that piece of software that bridges all other software to all the other hardware. The operating systems using Linux you can get come with loads of software, and in all different kind of flavors. As sixswornsermon suggested, there are indeed companies that release distributions intended for enterprise-level use. What distinguishes those distributions from the others is mostly the technical support. Ubuntu from Canonical for instance has a Business edition which comes with support by experts. I'm not sure though how their yearly fee relates to the license fee for Windows. There are free distributions out there with high-quality forums, but in my experience a little wading tends to occur.



Can Linux use VPN clients as well as windows? What about remote desktop and remote assistance as these are essential for businesses.


Linux distributions weren't just ugly because of the lack of artists in the community - it was also because the main focus of Linux developers has always been functionality
. Much of the attention of developers went to the area of networking. For VPN and remote desktop you'll be fine (for the latter, package 'rdesktop' should work).



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 04:59 AM
link   
I work with computers professionally for 20 years. Started with 2d graphics, continued through 3d graphics, animation and video postproduction, last 5 years I do only network administration and programing. I used MacOS and Windows (till XP/server 2003). Back in late nineties I needed router service and it was first time I met Linux personally. First experiences were really painful but I managed it to working state and I LEARNED lot of things about computer networks. Aside the router our company ran on Win servers/workstations. Administration of Win servers is pain because (design apart) of lack of documentation/pure quality of it. Win servers are expensive also. They are somehow easier for initial setup than Linux servers but maintenance is harder because there is NO TRANSPARENCY. Everything is patented and obscured in many ways. So I decided to change all of our servers to Linux. It took 3 years because M$ really do not support migration of data to other platforms - quite contrary. Now I successfully completed this opus. Result? We can use more services for less money. Stability is better, security also. Better scalability. Interoperability is much easier and wider. Linux (or UNIX like/POSIX OSes) stick to standards many times more than Win. I can use one type of OS (for sure in various flavors) for all devices: from tiny control devices through routers and office workstations to multi CPU server monsters.

Economically speaking: my work on new network system was expensive, more expensive than licenses for M$ services + its initial setup, would be. But I understand what is going on in the network because I was forced to understand it first! That would never happened with M$ approach "click here, click there". Result is that service availability increased, time for trouble solving decreased. VPN network I built is not replicable under Windows - it is not capable of such complex, secure AND CHEAP setup.

Back to OP. After many tests I realized that for my work (network admin/programer) is best suited one of oldest Linux distros Slackware. That is because I'm usually not satisfied with pre-compiled software in repositories and Slackware comes with almost full development chain. It is great for servers, company workstations (office work) and x86 based control devices. For routers with other than x86 architecture I use OpenWRT.

Forgot this: Money, which would end in coffer of some global slut ended in my coffer so I was able to support local economy. This should be argument for reluctant due to laziness.
edit on 12-5-2012 by JanAmosComenius because: 2add



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
I am currently dual-booting with Win7 and Ubuntu Studio 12.04. I am a long time musician and it has taken me 3 days just to configure Ubuntu Studio to run/recognize/record with my M-Audio Fast Track D.A.W.

I've pretty much taken a hiatus from Ubuntu Studio since everything runs great on my Win7 partition.
I've also just upgraded my computer to a gigabyte motherboard with an AMD FX 6100 six-core processor so both os's run pretty quickly without any tweaking, especially Linux.

If I could figure out how to get everything running smoothly on an ubuntu release, I would rid myself of windows entirely.



new topics
top topics
 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join