Linux and converter

[twodayslate]

I am debating if I should download Vista (illegally) or get Linux with XP (or Vista) in the background. If I should do the Linux, why should I use? I have a version of Linux right now on my D drive. Sorry, do not know what it is, have not used it in 5 months +.

My second question is what converter do you use for your iPod shows? Right now I use Jodix free iPod video converter but it never finishes and the quality is wretched.

[dimeric]

Heres a neat idea. You could pay for the software you use and not break the law!

[Doug.Mellon]

Heres a neat idea. You could pay for the software you use and not break the law!
I second that motion. Maybe this thread should get deleted so the forums dont. - Doug

[Pegasus]

The Linux version you have sounds best. Unless, of course, you decide to actually pay for whatever else you'll need.

Peg

[Thirsty Ferret]

Why bother with Vista? Linux is generally more stable, doesn't hog resources, and can be made to look so much prettier (with a bit of persuasion (http://www.beryl-project.org)).

[nox-Hand]

Why Windows:

- You want to pay to get Aero 3d Effects.
- You want to run proprietary software on a setup that won't run games as well as Windows XP
- You want to have the latest from Microsoft.
- You want a system with giant computer requirements. If it needs that much to run the Operating System, what will be left for your applications?
+ You can actually install Vista for free for 30 days, after which time you will have little use for it as it automatically shuts itself down

Why Linux:

- You want to get *free* Beryl 3d effects (http://beryl-project.org) that are so much prettier!
- You don't play too many proprietary games, but you might want to have Quake, Doom or other select native linux games - plus the hundreds of free games out there! You also want to take advantage of a legally free system that is updated often!
- You want a system that has little hardware requirements! Ubuntu has the minimal requirements of 256 mb ram! If you chose something more minimal you can have even less! Since the 3d effects are loaded to the GFX card, not the RAM, your PC will not be bogged down by it :)




It's all a matter of choice, I guess. If a pro-Windows user was here, he'd tell you much about why Linux isn't good. As Chris says, it's stable :)


I suggest trying this:


Install Vista (for the legal 30 day trial) and install Ubuntu (with Beryl 3d effects as an extra install) and try both.

Find out which 3d effect you like.

Find out what apps you like.

Figure it all out :D


It's a matter of choice; make the right one ;)
- You want to have the latest free goodness!

[dimeric]

Yeah if you want free go for linux! I'm afraid i am a "pro windows" user and wouldn't installl anything else (this is primarily becuase i like to write my own programs using winforms, these wont work on non windows computers!).

Windows is good, linux is good. If its for a home pc and you know the basics of computer security then its apples and pears (apart from price).

Another different point is that I wont get Vista, simply because unless you have a 64bit computer i dont think its worth it yet (sorry by the patch guard on 64bit vista really is very clever, and far better than any linux security) but MS backed down to market pressure from sygate and took it off the 32 bit version.

Interestingly you find that on systems with this patchguard running (like windows server 2003 64 bit). The stability is much higher as most crashes on windows are due to people patching the kernel, and these patches interfering, MS have finally fixed this (well sort of, theres also hyper visor but thats a bit different).

Anyway pay your money take your choice!

[Thirsty Ferret]

Anyway pay your money take your choice![/quote

Erm, not if you choose linux ;)

[quote=dimeric]64bit vista really is very clever, and far better than any linux security

There are several ways that sentence could be dissected. But I'll leave it as Linux has been using layered security since... ever. Microsoft think this is "clever" so included it in Vista. Genious... :rolleyes:

[nox-Hand]

64bit vista really is very clever, and far better than any linux security


Ouch, that one stung me :D

Now, if I was not insanely over my bedtime (*sigh*, 16 is such an age x) ) I would protest for a LONG time about this. Instead, I shall take it shortly.

You know those thousands of virus's Apple's "PC & Mac" commercials are talking about Mac being immune from? Yeah, Linux is sorta there, too! You see, Windows trojans and virusses dont work on Linux (anything Unix-based, as a matter of fact) as they are not built for Linux. There are - in fact - no known actual virusses for Linux, there are, however, hacks which violent hackers can use to exploit your system if you are stupid enough to open up things that are already securely locked as default when you get the OS.

Ever tried going to a website where all these ads try to install nasty malware on your Windows? Ah, but Linux doesn't accept that, so *poof* you are immune to that. I would like to see that get beat by Windows any day!



Sorry, will poke you guys tomorrow, very very late for bed!

[dimeric]

Anyway pay your money take your choice!
Its a saying, it means that there are lots of choices so compare them then choose one. (Oh and Linux isn't free if you want to use it for business a Redhat E5 subscription is 799USD a year!)

I'm really not desperate to have the "Linux VS Windows" argument. But the jist is that while Linux is certainly more secure than the older windows OSs (95, ME and 2000 especially) if you look at the statistics (Forester report, that one by the guy that built DB2 etc) you see that XP SP2 has the lowest bug count, patch count and is the only OS with no unpatched bugs.

The change in windows is summed up by David Litchfield in a quote for a cnet article a while back: "If you're looking to buy a new computer, the security features built into Vista tip the balance in its favor over other options such as Mac OS X," Litchfield said. "We've moved beyond the days of lots of bugs and worms. Recent history shows that Microsoft can get it right, as they did with XP SP2. With Vista, they will again demonstrate that."

Ever tried going to a website where all these ads try to install nasty malware on your Windows? Ah, but Linux doesn't accept that, so *poof* you are immune to that. I would like to see that get beat by Windows any day!

The last truely sucsseful browser attack was the SVG naitive code exploit, that allowed naitive code to run via SVG graphics. The only combination of OS and browser that this didn't effect was Vista (i think it was in RC stage at the time?) and IE7. It did effect *nix and mac OS (although obviously those browsers that don't support SVG's weren't all effected).

Basically your statements were correct but the windows of today is quite a different animal to that of the 90s. I like to base statements on evidence and im afraid the sweeping statements above MS products not being secure (or this stuff about layered security, MS have had it for quite a while! and infact use accounts which are more secure) just aren't true.

Either way i think we can all agree you shouldn't steal software!

[twodayslate]

Wow, this thread grew quickly. Sorry for the long reply.

I was talking to my friend and he said I should stick with windows. All of the programs I use are Windows/Mac only. For example Photoshop CS2, Dreamweaver, iTunes and much more. Would I even be able to play Oblivion?
The only reason I would download Linux would be for the GUI and some of there cool features.

My dad works in the military and he said he could get me Vista for $20. No that was not a typo - $20. :lol:

[nox-Hand]

(Oh and Linux isn't free if you want to use it for business a Redhat E5 subscription is 799USD a year!)

Oh dear, a victim of Windows's own "Why Windows is Cheaper" campaign :shady:

For starters, yes, there are some Linux distributions that are less than free, but that's bound to happen. Note that in RedHat E5 you get loads of support and help, etc, which you don't get if you install Windows Server 2003, for example. Therefore, if you note that, you are mostly paying for the support for the OS, which you'd have to pay to get if you had a problem with your Windows Server 2003, correct? =)
One is always welcome to use another free Linux distribution for a business ;-)


I'm really not desperate to have the "Linux VS Windows" argument. But the jist is that while Linux is certainly more secure than the older windows OSs (95, ME and 2000 especially) if you look at the statistics (Forester report, that one by the guy that built DB2 etc) you see that XP SP2 has the lowest bug count, patch count and is the only OS with no unpatched bugs.

Linux VS Windows. Oh, I am quite fine with people using Windows! As long as I don't have to ;-) Linux *is* about choice, and therefore one should have the option of using Windows XP Proprietary Edition =)

Why does Xp SP2 have the lowest bug count? Well, because Windows XP is a closed application, it's a set amount of apps, etc. When you have Linux, you have the stable Linux base system for which you won't find tons of bug reports. Then cometh the apps: when you find an error in the GNOME Desktop, it's not Linux at fault, now, is it? It's that application. The same as if you find a bug in Firefox, which you will do in Windows as well as Linux. See, any and all surveys and tests can show whatever you want it to. There are *tons* of tests that show Linux to be more secure, and if you want to go that way one can but look at the thousands of virusses that Windows can be infected with if you don't have an antivirus other than Window's own. That's a bug, is it not? =) That would mean that Linux has just got a few 0thousand immunities on the list of counting.

As you might note, anything can be twisted as much and little as you want. If you say it in the way you are, you are talking abuot bugs in Open Source. That's because it is Open Source meaning that anyone can contribute and that will obviously give some bugs here and there ;-)


The change in windows is summed up by David Litchfield in a quote for a cnet article a while back: "If you're looking to buy a new computer, the security features built into Vista tip the balance in its favor over other options such as Mac OS X," Litchfield said. "We've moved beyond the days of lots of bugs and worms. Recent history shows that Microsoft can get it right, as they did with XP SP2. With Vista, they will again demonstrate that."

"As they did with XP SP2"?? I swear my PC crashes more when I have Sp2 installed =(

Ah well, depends how you look at it I guess..



The last truely sucsseful browser attack was the SVG naitive code exploit, that allowed naitive code to run via SVG graphics. The only combination of OS and browser that this didn't effect was Vista (i think it was in RC stage at the time?) and IE7. It did effect *nix and mac OS (although obviously those browsers that don't support SVG's weren't all effected).

Sure, exploits will happen ;) That's no virus though. Probably affected OS X and *nix because they are both UNIX-based :) Mac is pretty much FreeBSD if you go under the hood too much =P


Basically your statements were correct but the windows of today is quite a different animal to that of the 90s. I like to base statements on evidence and im afraid the sweeping statements above MS products not being secure (or this stuff about layered security, MS have had it for quite a while! and infact use accounts which are more secure) just aren't true.

Either way i think we can all agree you shouldn't steal software!

Evidence? Sorry sir, I hath none to supply =( I lose I guess :lol:

If you go back to the 90's, sir, you might have trouble getting Desktop Linux to work ;) There *was* almost none. Linux first got ready for the desktop in the last few years, so it's slightly behind on the GUI front (apart from Niiiiiiiiice wobbly windows :rofl:) but security I have always found Linux the winner :) Never had an attack, never had a virus, never had a problem with my Linux :D


No stealing? Agreed! My box is 100% legal now =D



Wow, this thread grew quickly. Sorry for the long reply.
Right back at ya =)


I was talking to my friend and he said I should stick with windows. All of the programs I use are Windows/Mac only. For example Photoshop CS2, Dreamweaver, iTunes and much more. Would I even be able to play Oblivion?
The only reason I would download Linux would be for the GUI and some of there cool features.

If you want all that, you have to look at:

Do you think you could like the Gimp instead of CS2?
Do you think you could use nvu or bluefish instead of Dreamweaver?
Do you think you could use AmaroK or SongBird instead of iTunes?

Do you want to play Oblivion? Youd have trouble in Linux ;)


If you only want it for the fancy GUI then I'd stay away ;)



My dad works in the military and he said he could get me Vista for $20. No that was not a typo - $20. :lol:
Hmn, that's rather cheap :burnt: For that price I'd buy it and use it as a frisbee :rofl:


We can buy XP Pro here for... $50 x)

[dimeric]

Why does Xp SP2 have the lowest bug count? Well, because Windows XP is a closed application, it's a set amount of apps, etc. When you have Linux, you have the stable Linux base system for which you won't find tons of bug reports.
Actually most reports make it quite clear that they only include the core OS (so no add on programs that come with linux, as enterprise editions dont always come with them).

Therefore, if you note that, you are mostly paying for the support for the OS, which you'd have to pay to get if you had a problem with your Windows Server 2003, correct? =)
One is always welcome to use another free Linux distribution for a business ;-)

Again not quite, what you get is technical support (which you also get with MS stuff) but your getting guarantees of patching etc. You cannot use free Linux distros for high risk business because theres no guaruntee of furture patchs (this may not be true in practice but they have to think 'worst case'), and also (ragardless of what is claimed) free linux distros have the longest time between discovery and patch for exploits. While they publish Microsoft Security Advisory's often before the exploit is publically know, it can often take days for free linux distros (not much of a problem for home users, but a bank for example just couldn't operate).

Sure, exploits will happen
having your cake and eating it?

[twodayslate]

Thank you all for the information on Linux. I will just wait until I can get Vista.

Do any of you have any ideas on converters or is my free one good enough?