Future and impact of ongoing projects in Linux world

[Xen]

Colin Law schreef op 08-10-2016 18:29:
> On 8 October 2016 at 17:21, Xen <list at xenhideout.nl> wrote:
>> Ralf Mardorf schreef op 06-10-2016 12:42:
>>> 
>>> Just a very laste note.
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 2016-10-05 at 22:29 +0200, Xen wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> >> In Windows
>>>> 
>>>> Yes you conveniently break off my statement but (I had to look for 
>>>> it)
>>>> it was about something that has *nothing* to do with security as it
>>>> dealth with network shares.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yes, you mentioned Windows allows to do this and that, but Linux
>>> doesn't, so I pointed out, that Windows is insecure and Linux isn't. 
>>> I
>>> assume causality. There are reasons that Linux does work different to
>>> Windows.
>> 
>> 
>> And so whenever Linux can't do something, it is for security? Don't 
>> make me
>> laugh.
> 
> I think there is a difference between *can't* meaning is not able to
> and *won't allow* meaning there is something specifically stopping
> that from happening.  The *won't allow* features are generally for
> security reasons.

A root user also cannot do the things just mentioned.

The required software does not exist, for the most part.

There are also no security considerations whatsoever pertaining to the 
local system regarding the mounting of remote network shares on a user 
supplied home directory or equivalent. It is utter bull. You can make 
such generalized statements all you want but I hear nothing that 
actually addresses the topic. The infrastructure to do these things 
easily does not exist, not even if you supply a root or sudo password. 
That is simple fact. There are many things you can do after supplying a 
root or sudo password, including wiping the filesystem clean, and these 
are also not prevented for 'security reasons'.

We are 2016 and we still cannot mount samba shares easily. And when you 
mention this everyone that doesn't matter tries to wiggle out from under 
your gaze and pretends there are very good reasons why this is so.

I wish people would just stop lying about Linux so some actual work 
could actually be done. Every problem that is not acknowledged is also 
not solved. And what do we solve instead? Non-problems for the most 
part.

Because non-problems won't offend anyone if they are being addressed. No 
one's ego is harmed when you don't say something is wrong. Or not wrong, 
whatever you want. You will find "improvements" left and right that are 
actually detrimental and nothing much is advancing. The services we have 
today cannot really do more than those of the past. SystemD makes stuff 
easier but previously this functionality did also exist. Hacking around 
Linux was a lot easier in the past, I believe. Don't count my word for 
everthing but complexity has gone up, not down. Unity is not really a 
great success from my point of view and it is worse than Cinnamon that 
has much less resources to go at it. Cinnamon in the meantime also makes 
improvements that are detriments, such as reversing all "yes/no" buttons 
and "okay/cancel" buttons in their order, which just messes up your mind 
completely.

KDE does everything but the right thing and of all the window-switchers 
none suffices. Until you edit the "large icons" theme so it becomes the 
"medium icons" theme and suddenly you have something that is actually 
pleasing to use. Why they supply big icons (that are too large) and 
small icons (that are too small) but no medium icons in between (that 
would actually work) is beyond me.

Constantly trying to invent new stuff when it is not necessary. 
Constantly trying to be "different" from the main protagonists but there 
is no reason to. Cinnamon does so well regardless because many choices 
are just obvious: Cinnamon /does/ have a medium icon Window Switcher 
that just works.

Something that doesn't require any configuration and works out of the 
box in a nice style. Why people constantly try to come up with new ideas 
that then subsequently do not even work, is beyond me. Just in order to 
be different... Just so you can claim you are "not windows"? I don't 
know...

Windows makes it convenient, so you make it inconvenient.
Windows makes it insecure, so you make it secure.

Everything in response to something else, reactionary.

There is not actually a reason to base yourself on something else, you 
can take yourself as your own point of reference and only try to be 
better than what you were before. You can simply create what you want 
and do not have to look at something else to claim you don't want to be 
that.

I must say I applaud Ubuntu selling paid apps though and I think that is 
something Linux needs. And pardon this bad writing, once more.

Regards.