DirectX 9 for Linux

[William]

I think that the problem is partly that making things simple to use is not quite the same as making them good. To try a risk analogy... Suppose you sell sweatshirts; and you can cut our expenses by selling only one size (extra extra large) that will fit over all your customers. So you simplify your ordering and sales; and the sweatshirt keeps everyone warm, and they don't have to worry about trying it one, they know it'll fit, and there's no alternative anyway.

But for most people the excess material will catch on things, takes up extra space in their wardrobe, mean that they can't wear certain jackets over the top of it......

To my way of thinking, trying to make a one size fits all operating system is much the same problem. It works after a fashion, but it isn't really what was needed and has unexpected drawbacks that weren't obvious when the sweatshirt was bought/OS selected.

[Kurt]

Originally posted by leech
As far as security is concerned... the default setup for linux IS a lot more secure than the default setup for windows.

As if. It's only as good as the password you could come up for root. And that usually takes a few seconds to crack as 99% of the ppl aren't capable of coming up with a decent password. Or just try NFS...

Originally posted by leech And actually windows Driver support actually isn't as good as you'd think it'd be... there are quite a few devices out there that don't get updated windows drivers from Win9x to WinXP.

They also are the same that *never* had a Linux driver.

Originally posted by leech Granted they're mostly older devices... but this really all depends on the company. But then again, seeing as how there are so many problems with hardware combinations out there... what do we blame, the hardware (which will work fine under linux, but not windows in some cases) or do we blame the software? Which as I said, in some cases linux will run just fine on some boxes and even the so-called more stable WinXP will run crappy as all hell on the same box.

Leech

I didn't say XP was more stable (or not) than Linux.

Most of the "hardware" problems are user-related...

Originally posted by Wombat Generally Linux distros have everything turned off by default, as opposed to Windows. Hell, Windows has services and exploits you can't even turn off!

Everything turned off?? http server, ftp server, sendmail, nfs, bind, dns and whatnot. Linux has at least as many useless services as a default Windows installation, with the added benefit that lots are actually servers ready to spread damage.

The most common e-mail server is also the one with most exploits that script kiddies can use at their leisure...and it's not Exchange...

A direct and common mistake made by administrators that have no clue and think that Linux is secure.

[Sasq]

what was the last linux distro you installed Kurt.

And in case you dont get my point, I am getting irritated with you constant posts of "facts" that go against reality

[Wombat]

No kidding. Let's take Fedora as an example. First, it comes with ipchains and whatnot tightly configured. Second, if you choose a desktop installation, http, ftp, sendmail, dns, etc, aren't even <B>installed</B>. Compare this to Windows, where services like RPC are on be default, and in many cases CAN'T be turned off, or the system will not run AT ALL.

Root passwords: You're blaming Linux for the actions of stupid users? WTF? Besides, it's easy (if not default) to disalllow remote root logins, so they'd have to crack TWO passwords.


Oh, and now Windows doesn't have hardware problems? They're user related? WTF?
First of all, we have USB devices at work that can bluescreen an entire dual-proc Win2003. How the hell can an OS let that happen?
Second, why can we hang the NT SCSI layer so badly that it takes a reboot to fix it?

[DGhost]

Originally posted by Wombat
No kidding. Let's take Fedora as an example. First, it comes with ipchains and whatnot tightly configured. Second, if you choose a desktop installation, http, ftp, sendmail, dns, etc, aren't even <B>installed</B>. Compare this to Windows, where services like RPC are on be default, and in many cases CAN'T be turned off, or the system will not run AT ALL.

Root passwords: You're blaming Linux for the actions of stupid users? WTF? Besides, it's easy (if not default) to disalllow remote root logins, so they'd have to crack TWO passwords.


Oh, and now Windows doesn't have hardware problems? They're user related? WTF?
First of all, we have USB devices at work that can bluescreen an entire dual-proc Win2003. How the hell can an OS let that happen?
Second, why can we hang the NT SCSI layer so badly that it takes a reboot to fix it?

no worse than when the USB mouse on a stand-alone Linux box causes the kernel compiled USB drivers to gib, taking out not only the mouse, but the keyboard as well in such a fashion that unplugging and replugging the keyboard/mouse back in don't work and you cannot just plug it into the PS2 port because *that* only gets detected at start up.

I do have to wonder why you are comparing RPC to http, DNS, sendmail, etc...

[dZeus]

personally I've seen loads and loads of weird problems in linux when APIC is enabled in linux. Weird those motherboards supported APIC fine in windows...

only chipsets I generally have had little APIC problems with in linux are Intel chipsets.

I believe drivers for Windows are generally speaking much better, especially if the manufacturer takes the trouble of putting them through WHQL.

[Wombat]

Originally posted by DGhost

I do have to wonder why you are comparing RPC to http, DNS, sendmail, etc...

Kurt was bringing up the subject of possibly exploitable services.

[dZeus]

fact is, if you run windows update regularly and enable a firewall on your net connection, you are quite safe in Windows.

Though IE and outlook do seem to attrackt massive amounts of worms/virusses that use known exploits, which is a worrying indication that maybe they haven't really been programmed with security in mind

[leech]

Originally posted by dZeus
personally I've seen loads and loads of weird problems in linux when APIC is enabled in linux. Weird those motherboards supported APIC fine in windows...

only chipsets I generally have had little APIC problems with in linux are Intel chipsets.

I believe drivers for Windows are generally speaking much better, especially if the manufacturer takes the trouble of putting them through WHQL.

WHQL doesn't mean crap. I had more crashes/problems with the Parhelia's WHQL driver than I had with any of the non-WHQL certified drivers.

The APIC problems I've heard of usually are from Via chipsets (which suck anyhow) and laptop chipsets.

And if windows drivers weren't generally speaking better, than the world would definitely be backwards...since most drivers for linux are reverse engineered and the Windows ones are programmed by the same company that designed the hardware (at least in most cases)

Leech

[leech]

As if. It's only as good as the password you could come up for root. And that usually takes a few seconds to crack as 99% of the ppl aren't capable of coming up with a decent password. Or just try NFS...

At least linux REQUIRES a password for Root... how many desktop users actually use a password on their Administrator account at all? How many desktop users are always logged into Administrator?

As far as security of Windows goes... what about this new rash of worms that only affect websites that are run off of IIS and you can only get infected if you browse those infected websites with IE. Yup, windows is very secure.... If some IIS admin doesn't feel like patching, you could have your computer messed up pretty good just by browsing a website.

Leech

[dZeus]

Originally posted by leech
WHQL doesn't mean crap. I had more crashes/problems with the Parhelia's WHQL driver than I had with any of the non-WHQL certified drivers.

The APIC problems I've heard of usually are from Via chipsets (which suck anyhow) and laptop chipsets.

And if windows drivers weren't generally speaking better, than the world would definitely be backwards...since most drivers for linux are reverse engineered and the Windows ones are programmed by the same company that designed the hardware (at least in most cases)

Leech

not just VIA, also SIS. How or why Windows drivers are better doesn't change the end result, does it?

[Wombat]

I wouldn't say they're better. My 686B worked well in Linux LONG before Windows got a decent fix.

[Wombat]

Originally posted by dZeus
fact is, if you run windows update regularly and enable a firewall on your net connection, you are quite safe in Windows.

None of this applies to business users.

First, a firewall does not protect you from inside threats. One VPN connection, or one laptop back from a business trip, and your firewall is useless.

Second, it takes about a month to deploy a Windows fix. MS has a long history of shitty patches, which would often break an application, if not the entire OS. So no, you can't just accept MS patches.
That is, IF they patch. Known exploits are often left open for months.

[isochar]

Wombat, are you implying that Linux patches are of greater quality and hence corporate validation takes less time than a windows one?

Also, I don't remember where I read this, but upwards of 99% of security compromises on all platforms are due to human error/incompetence/etc. IMHO, the only reason Linux *seems* to be more secure is due to the hardcore crowd that compromises most of its ranks. As soon as Linux has its equivalent for a run-of-the-mill Windows Administrators, you'll see the same shit hit the fan as it did for MS.

[Marshmallowman]

Well, back to the original topic.

Can't you still get wineX free from CVS, eg the development open source version of transgaming stuff.