Linux and the macroquest

thanatos · Post by **thanatos** » Wed May 26, 2004 8:02 pm

I would have to agree with Lax on this one. Linux is basically good as a server, or maybe as an office desktop. IMO Windows 9x was rather shit, because of all the crap and the memory leaks and bullshit, but XP is significantly improved over 9x, and I am willing to bet Longhorn will be damn nice too. DirectX is a great API (although I could do without the really long names of constants LOL) and Windows is shaping up rather decently. I can jam through most Win boxes faster than most average people can keep up, something I just never got to doing in Linux, where I mainly use the shell anyway. No point in preaching about how great an OS is, they are made for different things. Windows is a desktop environment, Linux is for servers. Simple as that.

hawker · Post by **hawker** » Wed May 26, 2004 8:53 pm

contrary to popular belief by many linux users, linux is not a substitute for showering, brushing your teeth or using deoderant.

Mimatas · Post by **Mimatas** » Wed May 26, 2004 10:45 pm

I'm willing to be longhorn will never exist.. at least not in the way M$ wants it to. Microsoft is trying to make a provably secure OS... by provably secure, that means basically proving that the kernel is secure, then only allowing applications that are verified as secure to run. For starters... Microsoft and secure never go together. Second.. if they WERE able to write a provably secure kernel, only programs certified as secure by microsoft would be allowed to access all the necessary functions. End result: any software company that wants to run software on longhorn (with any reasonable power) has to pay to have microsoft certify their software as secure.

Undoubtedly you've installed manufacturer's drivers on your computer sometime recently... most likely you saw a warning saying that the driver was not Microsoft certified. This is the beginning of it. I've been told that Microsoft is pushing to have 'secure' operations separated in hardware, to guarantee that only 'secure' applications can access them. If, in fact, microsoft wants any hope of writing a provably secure OS, this needs to be done.

My theory: Microsoft will realize that 1. mathematically proving that a kernel is secure is insanely tedious, and 2. software companies don't want to pay money just to have their software run on a computer. Thus, Longhorn, in it's currently envisioned state, will never exist.

This being said, the new version of windows will, (lets hope) at least have better memory management.

Also, in case you're wondering.. I don't think M$ is the antichrist.. and I use a PC. I just think that the task they're attempting to undertake is doomed to failure.

As for this thread.. holy shit how long can it go on? Arguing on the internet is like running int he special olympics. Sure you may win, but you're still retarded. (I'd link the all too well known pic, but I don't have it atm)

Daeas · Post by **Daeas** » Wed May 26, 2004 10:45 pm

As I have never dealt with Linux in my life, I will post relevant information here...

I like Cheese!

Ok...

p.s.

Thank you to those that hav spent the time working on MQ and all the parts of it. It has greatly increased my enjoyment of the game

As far as attitude...

I act completely different in EQ then I do in RL. As a Cert. Chef if i told someone "ROFL" in the real world they would look at me and wonder what I am coughing up. I understand the way Lax works here and I think its ok on the boards as long as he is not the same in RL.

Personally... I dont see him as the same asshole in RL but then again.. you never truly know someone...

Programmer · Post by **Programmer** » Wed May 26, 2004 11:28 pm

There is less inherent insecurity behind M$ than the media portrays. They've got their share of exploitable bugs (and then some), but the main problem they have is much more basic than this.

Note, this is not my original idea, and for all I can remember I saw it posted on these forums. Props where they are due, sorry to whomever I'm neglecting to name.

The largest problem with M$ is their o/s has only one default user login, and this login has full admin rights to everything on the system. The worst exploitive bug is only as powerful as the user running the fucked up program. M$'s installation procedure makes no effort to educate users about login access levels, and how for security purposes, making two logins for yourself (one with admin rights, rarely used, and the other inable to do installations, etc) is a more secure approach.

Linux distributions all vary in how they set up the user list, but most (if not all) at least encourage users to make low-privillage accounts in addition to root (the does-all admin account). Linux might not always educate people about why it's done this way, but at least it encourages people better. It's a simple step, but in the M$ world, it could help.

thanatos · Post by **thanatos** » Wed May 26, 2004 11:43 pm

Mimatas wrote:I'm willing to be longhorn will never exist.. at least not in the way M$ wants it to. Microsoft is trying to make a provably secure OS... by provably secure, that means basically proving that the kernel is secure, then only allowing applications that are verified as secure to run. For starters... Microsoft and secure never go together. Second.. if they WERE able to write a provably secure kernel, only programs certified as secure by microsoft would be allowed to access all the necessary functions. End result: any software company that wants to run software on longhorn (with any reasonable power) has to pay to have microsoft certify their software as secure.

Undoubtedly you've installed manufacturer's drivers on your computer sometime recently... most likely you saw a warning saying that the driver was not Microsoft certified. This is the beginning of it. I've been told that Microsoft is pushing to have 'secure' operations separated in hardware, to guarantee that only 'secure' applications can access them. If, in fact, microsoft wants any hope of writing a provably secure OS, this needs to be done.

My theory: Microsoft will realize that 1. mathematically proving that a kernel is secure is insanely tedious, and 2. software companies don't want to pay money just to have their software run on a computer. Thus, Longhorn, in it's currently envisioned state, will never exist.

This being said, the new version of windows will, (lets hope) at least have better memory management.

Also, in case you're wondering.. I don't think M$ is the antichrist.. and I use a PC. I just think that the task they're attempting to undertake is doomed to failure.

As for this thread.. holy shit how long can it go on? Arguing on the internet is like running int he special olympics. Sure you may win, but you're still retarded. (I'd link the all too well known pic, but I don't have it atm)

Hmm that is part of that crap they were proposing to do a while ago, I forget the name. Was supposed to be some crazy DRM scheme to make it so you couldn't warez anything or some such. WTF was it called? Anyway I doubt it will make it into Longhorn. I am sort of looking forward to the new file system and the new stuff though. Personally I like eyecandy hehehe.

@Programmer, that is quite true. Another thing they have "wrong" is that so many people use Windows, it creates a knowledge base and user base wide enough that worms and such are really effective (i.e. lots of people can learn to make them, find exploits in Windows etc). Also you are right about the multiuser bit, and it extends even farther than that. Windows, unlike UNIX/Linux was never meant to be a multiuser system from the start, so it didn't incorporate features of a multiuser system, such as network security bits. Of course this changes with NT and such. Anyway, Windows is great for games, I don't use Linux much because it can't run my games and half of my computer stuff won't work in it. However, it is great for fixing Windows if it ever gets screwed up.

Pigeon · Post by **Pigeon** » Thu May 27, 2004 2:08 am

Palladium? They renamed it to something else, or just took the name away entirely. But Palladium, as in the name, doesn't exist anymore. The technology still does though.

Whatever though. I don't care how much DRM they embed in it, people are still gonna hack it, they're still going to distribute it, and I'm still going to download it from them... for free.

And- I'm not going to buy any hardware that prevents me from running any piece of software I feel like on it.

ps: the pic you were looking for:

Lax · Post by **Lax** » Thu May 27, 2004 2:42 am

You know, one thing that sticks in my mind Lax is a post you made on the main page. Some thing about like what you see hire me. This has nothing to do with linux,MQ,or windows. If I were a employer and seen the way to address people here on this forum, I would not hire you if you were the last programer on the earth. I speak for many. You do great work but you realy need to learn how to treat all people with respect. Jobless ? I wonder why ? I have been holding my toung for some time now. Watching you tear down people to bring them to your level. I dont care how you respond to this as I know you will show your age and your ass thinking your impressing the masses. Your not impressing shit ! Grow the fuck up ! Then Maybe , just maybe some one will see you have changed and hire your lame ass.

Nuff said !
Not meant as an attack just a kind hint !

Why couldnt you just post on one of the other threads along with the other fucking losers who dont appreciate what we do as developers, instead of derailing a thread about operating systems and the possibility of MQ2 running on ones other than windows. I treat people with the respect they deserve, and if they do not deserve respect why should I treat them with respect? Just like you, why the fuck should I support your stupid ass when you open your fat fucking mouth talking about shit you have no clue about. And what the FUCK makes you think that employers are coming into the macroquest MESSAGE BOARDS and looking for my replies to the fucking idiots? They can certainly read hundreds and hundreds of excellent support, instead of finding the oh.. 50-100 of my couple thousand posts that are flames. This is a casual environment, if you think otherwise then get the fuck out right now. Further, in a casual environment I will act casually... aka flame people who deserve to be flamed. If you wish to be in a professional environment, get the fuck out of the public sections. It's like telling actors you wouldnt hire them because of the way they act toward papparazi. Jack Nicholson is one of the most bad-ass actors ever, and if I was a director and he fit the part, I would hire him even if he slugged some fucker trying to get his picture while he was eating. I wouldnt be hiring him to talk to papparazi, I would be hiring him to act. Same thing here, theyre not hiring me to play the part of fucking Brenlo. They want me to develop and work with fellow developers and other professionals (note that the people that get flamed here are decidedly not professionals). So fine, dont hire me to be your fucking tech support or customer service rep, thats not the job I'm looking for. I wouldnt hire you either, because you're a fucking idiot. If you and I were the last two human beings left on earth, I would just kill you so I wouldnt have to hear your stupid fucking mouth. I would rather be in eternal silence. Okay, I've "shown my age" and I'm "impressing everyone" or the couple dozen people who read it. If you havent gotten a clue yet, what is important is the people who actually use the software and realize its quality. That's what is on my resume, not "I sit around on message boards kissing lamers asses who just bitch and moan when something doesnt work right and don't give me anything for my time anyway".

You should have just not posted and saved me the time spent banning you. If you use someones software I suggest "acting professionally" next time. What the fuck do I owe you and who are you to tell me how I have to treat your stupid fucking ass?

Mimatas · Post by **Mimatas** » Thu May 27, 2004 3:05 am

If you and I were the last two human beings left on earth, I would just kill you so I wouldnt have to hear your stupid fucking mouth. I would rather be in eternal silence.

ROFLMAO. I'm gonna use that.

notadruid · Post by **notadruid** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 10:34 am

I doubt Cedega would allow interfacing between two windows-emulated programs in order for MQ2 to load into EQ's memory. Furthermore, I don't think this is an MQ2 problem but a Cedega problem. Interestingly, however, MQ2Auth always generates the same key on a given Linux installation.

fearless · Post by **fearless** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:35 am

Jesus christ . . . stop bumping 8 month old posts . . . if there hasn't been a post on a thread in that long, it's pretty safe to say that we no longer fucking care.

aChallenged1 · Post by **aChallenged1** » Mon Jan 17, 2005 11:47 am

lock it please?

Linux and the macroquest

OS security