Canonical (Ubuntu) confirms high Linux return rate - Linux future on netbooks "bleaker than we thought"
Ezekiel
Well, when we touched base today with Gerry Carr, marketing manager at
Canonical (the creator of the Ubuntu operating system) we learned that MSI's
research extends beyond its own products. See his comments below, but it
seems Linux' future on the netbook is bleaker than we thought.
"We don't know what the XP return rates are. But I will say that the
return rate is above normal for netbooks that offer open-source operating
systems," Carr echoed. Carr highlighted a few reasons why Ubuntu-running
netbooks are returned more often. "Unclear selling is happening, typically
online. The customer will get their netbook sent to their home and they
imagine to find something like a Microsoft desktop, but they see a brown
Ubuntu version. They are unwilling to learn it and they were expecting to
have Windows."
</quote>
http://www.forevergeek.com/2008/10/is_linux_losing_ground_in_the_netbook_market/
Doctor Smith
Gee what a surprise!
Putting Linux on mainstream hardware for average Joe to use, IOW desktop,
laptop,netbook, etc is like the kiss of death.
Can you imagine little Susie (no pun intended) turning on her new netbook
only to find some oddball operating system like Linux?
She can't even go to her friends or family for help because chances are
good none of them know Linux either.
Linux is a dud.
Megabyte
If the competition is going to be Windows 7 Starter Edition with
constraints around how many applications you can run in addition to
Windows Activation, WGA, DRM, etc...Linux looks pretty darn good! In
fact maybe there will be a deal on refurbished Linux models from the
Windows users that couldn't figure them out and returned them.
Dirk T. Verbeek
Sure, for people with below average inquisitiveness and intelligence it
might be a bit of a surprise, you are clearly in that category :)
And of course there is among the group you represent an above average
number that can't read or comprehend the specifications the website
offers, again no surprise.
But for the vast majority of users it's just a way of running a computer
for the things that count, reliable, fast and in case of the netbook
distro's exceptionally easy to operate.
So why don't you go back and preach to your own lot:
news:microsoft.public.security.virus
b.t.w, strange how MS categorises viruses under public.security while
many of their customers see it as insecurity...
LOL!
chrisv
news:49986545$0$188$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
Dirk (Dork)
Je lult uit je nek!
http://www.geekzone.co.nz/blog.asp?postid=6229
How to write a Linux virus in 5 easy steps.
*PLONK*
Bill Bonde { No matter what happens, it's caused by global warming )
chrisv wrote:
>
> "Dirk T. Verbeek" <dver...@xs4all.nl> schreef in bericht
> >
> > b.t.w, strange how MS categorises viruses under public.security while many
> > of their customers see it as insecurity...
> >
> > LOL!
>
> Dirk (Dork)
> Je lult uit je nek!
> http://www.geekzone.co.nz/blog.asp?postid=6229
> How to write a Linux virus in 5 easy steps.
> *PLONK*
>
That's an interesting text. It looks like more care in limiting the
use of the sodoers enabled accounts is going to be required. That
might mean never using that account for any general uses like
e-mail and whatnot.
My only question would be how to access a sodoers account from a
potentially compromised limited account without giving away the
password to the sodoers account.
--
He and Evie soon fell into a conversation of the "No, I didn't;
yes, you did" type--conversation which, though fascinating to those
who are engaged in it, neither desires nor deserves the attention
of others.
-+E.M. Forster, "Howards End"
Dirk T. Verbeek
>
>
> Dirk (Dork)
> Je lult uit je nek!
> http://www.geekzone.co.nz/blog.asp?postid=6229
> How to write a Linux virus in 5 easy steps.
> *PLONK*
>
Sure Chris.
The article you brought us shows a very interesting insight in the way
present Linux desktops can be attacked through the old vector of user
stupidity.
And we are no doubt all wiser thanks to this person's smart strategy.
As Linux is in a continuous state of development other scenario's will
be thought out.
And potential holes will be plugged faster than a virus scanner database
is updated.
I will copy the reply of one person:
===============
"This is not a virus, for something to be classified as a virus it need
to be self-replicating to other machines and without user interaction.
What you have created here is a mallicous script, which relys on the
users stupidnes, aka a trojan horse."
===============
This man might not have a spell checker but he knows what is the key to
success for the proposed attack, the user.
Quite a difference with one of the viruses we are right now seeing in
the MS world where in the last few weeks the simple connecting of a USB
storage device has been sufficient to infect over 10 million PC's.
Now that is self-replicating!
Darth Chaos
It just confirms my belief that Amerikans are lazy, ignorant slobs who
are unwilling to get up off their obese diabetes asses and learn new
things.
Bit Twister
>
>
> My only question would be how to access a sodoers account from a
> potentially compromised limited account without giving away the
> password to the sodoers account.
Sounds like you have it bss aackwards. You never do/allow any sudo
activity from an account which might be compromised from internet activity.
Just for fun, create an account, say hotmail. Then
sudo -i
echo "
DISPLAY=:0.0
export DISPLAY
thunderbird
exit
" >> ~hotmail/.bash_profile
And to prevent change by any malicious script/code:
chown root:root ~hotmail/.bash_profile
chown root:root ~hotmail/.bashrc
exit
Next, create a hotmail desktop shortcut/launcher with the command
sudo /bin/su -l hotmail
Now when you click the shortcut, thunderbird should come up.
Configure it to connect to your Hotmail email account.
When you exit thunderbird, the window closes.
Whatever you do in hotmail stays in hotmail.
Do the same for browsing the internet, create brower, use firefox in
place of thunderbird.
Want to bypass all the linux password activity when running hotmail/browser
shortcuts, fix up /etc/sudoers with something like
# User alias specification
User_Alias FULLTIMERS = your_linux_id_here
# Cmnd alias specification
Cmnd_Alias SU = /usr/bin/su
# User privilege specification
root ALL=(ALL) SETENV: ALL
FULLTIMERS ALL = NOPASSWD: ALL
--
The warranty and liability expired as you read this message.
If the above breaks your system, it's yours and you keep both pieces.
Practice safe computing. Backup the file before you change it.
Do a, man command_here or cat command_here, before using it.
JEDIDIAH
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 11:11:10 -0500, Ezekiel wrote:
>
>> <quote>
>>
>> Well, when we touched base today with Gerry Carr, marketing manager at
>> Canonical (the creator of the Ubuntu operating system) we learned that MSI's
>> research extends beyond its own products. See his comments below, but it
>> seems Linux' future on the netbook is bleaker than we thought.
>>
>> "We don't know what the XP return rates are. But I will say that the
>> return rate is above normal for netbooks that offer open-source operating
>> systems," Carr echoed. Carr highlighted a few reasons why Ubuntu-running
>> netbooks are returned more often. "Unclear selling is happening, typically
>> online. The customer will get their netbook sent to their home and they
>> imagine to find something like a Microsoft desktop, but they see a brown
>> Ubuntu version. They are unwilling to learn it and they were expecting to
>> have Windows."
>>
>> </quote>
>>
>> http://www.forevergeek.com/2008/10/is_linux_losing_ground_in_the_netbook_market/
>
> Gee what a surprise!
>
> Putting Linux on mainstream hardware for average Joe to use, IOW desktop,
> laptop,netbook, etc is like the kiss of death.
...just goes to show how mathematically handicapped the average Lemming is.
>
> Can you imagine little Susie (no pun intended) turning on her new netbook
> only to find some oddball operating system like Linux?
Little Susie isn't the problem. Little ones tend to be highly adaptable
and won't be terribly bothered by something new and strange. It's the old
geezers set in their ways that think they need msoffice for trivial
correspondences that will be shocked and appalled by Linux.
Little Susie will barely notice.
> She can't even go to her friends or family for help because chances are
> good none of them know Linux either.
>
> Linux is a dud.
Anyone bright enough not to be a menace as a Windows admin can easily
pick up Solaris, nevermind Linux.
However, that still doesn't alter the basic math of the situation.
5 steps ahead and 2 behind is still 3 steps ahead. No number of whining
Cassandras can really change the basic numbers.
--
Nothing quite gives you an understanding of mysql's |||
popularity as does an attempt to do some simple date / | \
manipulations in postgres.
chrisv
> some idiot forging chrisv wrote:
>>
>> Dirk (Dork)
>> Je lult uit je nek!
>> http://www.geekzone.co.nz/blog.asp?postid=6229
>> How to write a Linux virus in 5 easy steps.
>> *PLONK*
>
> Sure Chris.
Ignore the forger.
Ezekiel
"Darth Chaos" <DarthCha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:644b877f-f8ae-498b...@f24g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
I see it differently. It is people like *you* who are willing to sit on
your obese diabetic ass all day long and tinker with computers. As if
compiling your driver from source is accomplishing something.
Americans would rather spend their day skiing, golfing or spending time
with their family. The average person is about as interested in sitting in
front of their computer all day as they are in rebuilding their auto
transmission. So why is your lard ass parked in front of the computer all
day instead of doing something real with your life?
Bill Bonde { No matter what happens, it's caused by global warming )
Bit Twister wrote:
>
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 20:53:03 +0000, Bill Bonde { No matter what happens, it's caused by global warming ) wrote:
> >
> >
> > My only question would be how to access a sodoers account from a
> > potentially compromised limited account without giving away the
> > password to the sodoers account.
>
> Sounds like you have it bss aackwards. You never do/allow any sudo
> activity from an account which might be compromised from internet activity.
>
Thanks for the ideas, but what you are suggesting below is
basically always running as root and counting on that account not
being compromised because of your other defences. But if you are
running as root and just put in a flash drive, or stupidly load a
bad program, won't that come in under that account and therefore
open a risk directly to root? Now I'm not claiming that a sudoer
enabled account fairs much better since if it is compromised, all
the threat has to do is monitor for the next use of that account
and sudo and steal the password.
But what if the sudoer account is never directly logged into but is
instead logged into from ssh with some sort of encryption. That
would mean that the key would need to be stored offline. What if
that was in a different VM that otherwise was totally isolated? I
mean basically:
Hardware OS running the following VMs:
VM for Firefox access
VM for e-mail
VM for secure Firefox
VM for office stuff
VM for administrative purposes
The only access to sudoer enabled or root accounts in any of the
non-administrative VMs would be via ssh. The Hardware OS, which
could be anything, mix it up maybe, make it Solaris even, would
also be locked down to the extent that it can be. For example, the
administrative VM wouldn't have access to the internet or flash
drives or anything maybe except through a monitored and logged ssh.
Perhaps it is only running when it needs to be run. The weight of
doing this might be currently prohibitive for many people.
Regarding the set-up below, if I use "ssh system_host -l firefox"
as my run link, I should be able to log in via a non-sudoer enabled
account and avoid the issues I was concerned about above. That is I
can still use my ordinary limited account as my general use account
to spawn off these also very limited accounts, all not messing with
each other.
My main test machine is running ltsp so there are other boxes that
can log in. I know that Firefox does not like to have more than one
instance of itself run per account. This would suggest that I need
several Firefoxes, perhaps at least one for each regular account
user. So I think I'd have accounts Firefox-user1-secure,
Firefox-user1-general, Firefox-user2-secure, etc.
I'm still investigating all this as it seems that logging into
Ubuntu using a non-sudoers account runs GNOME at user privileges so
there's no easy way to shutdown the computer.
Bit Twister
>
>
> Bit Twister wrote:
> Thanks for the ideas, but what you are suggesting below is
> basically always running as root
Did not suggest that. I never run as root unless I have to
do something requiring root privs.
> and counting on that account not
> being compromised because of your other defences.
That "account" is my normal user account "bittwister" no internet
activity is executed in my user account. Those other accounts can not
get into bittwister's account.
> But if you are
> running as root and just put in a flash drive, or stupidly load a
> bad program, won't that come in under that account and therefore
> open a risk directly to root?
Once again, not root's account. Matter of fact I do not run a desktop
manager in root's account.
> What if that was in a different VM that otherwise was totally isolated?
VMs are another method of isolation. I have seen patches to VMs to
close exploits harmful to the Host system from the running guest.
> Regarding the set-up below, if I use "ssh system_host -l firefox"
> as my run link,
Yep, I was using ssh myself before setting up sudo su access.
> My main test machine is running ltsp so there are other boxes that
> can log in. I know that Firefox does not like to have more than one
> instance of itself run per account. This would suggest that I need
> several Firefoxes, perhaps at least one for each regular account
> user. So I think I'd have accounts Firefox-user1-secure,
> Firefox-user1-general, Firefox-user2-secure, etc.
Yes, and I do not want my bank account running firefox while firefox
is up in another account. Script checks for a running firefox and if
found, run xmessage to tell me to close offending firefox app.
Code snippet follows:
_app=firefox
pgrep $_app
if [ $? -eq 0 ] ; then
xmessage "Close other $_app applications
"
exit 0
fi
JEDIDIAH
>
> "Darth Chaos" <DarthCha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:644b877f-f8ae-498b...@f24g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
>> On Feb 15, 11:11 am, "Ezekiel" <th...@here.com> wrote:
>>> http://www.forevergeek.com/2008/10/is_linux_losing_ground_in_the_netb...
>>
>> It just confirms my belief that Amerikans are lazy, ignorant slobs who
>> are unwilling to get up off their obese diabetes asses and learn new
>> things.
>
> I see it differently. It is people like *you* who are willing to sit on
> your obese diabetic ass all day long and tinker with computers. As if
> compiling your driver from source is accomplishing something.
>
> Americans would rather spend their day skiing, golfing or spending time
Nope. They would rather sit idly in front of the TV.
[deletia]
This is why the rest of them are diabetic and obese.
--
|||
In a free market, the herd should be irrelevant. / | \
Chris Ahlstrom
this bit o' wisdom:
> On 2009-02-17, Ezekiel <th...@here.com> wrote:
>>
>> "Darth Chaos" <DarthCha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>>> On Feb 15, 11:11 am, "Ezekiel" <th...@here.com> wrote:
> [deletia]
>>>> http://www.forevergeek.com/2008/10/is_linux_losing_ground_in_the_netb...
>>>
>>> It just confirms my belief that Amerikans are lazy, ignorant slobs who
>>> are unwilling to get up off their obese diabetes asses and learn new
>>> things.
I'll meet you on the pitch.
>> Americans would rather spend their day skiing, golfing or spending time
>
> Nope. They would rather sit idly in front of the TV.
And what better way to combine that with a computer hobby!
> [deletia]
>
> This is why the rest of them are diabetic and obese.
--
Don't try to have the last word -- you might get it.
-- Lazarus Long