Side-grading from XP to Linux.

[AgeGap]

When Microsoft stop issuing updates to XP, in what I have read to be early 2009, I am thinking of running some sort of Linux. Are there any pratfalls to lookout for? What should I do about internet security? How do I find out if Linux will even run on my computer? Anything I should be aware of?

Thanks
AgeGap

 

[GodMark2]

The first thing you should be aware of is that Linux is just the operating system. In order to make it work like your current system, there are a lot of other software packages you'll need to install. For instance, Linux doesn't include any way to draw 'windows' for an application, or use the mouse in any way. Luckily, many smart people have done a lot of work creating 'distros' that include the things you'll be likely to want (like window management and mouse use), and other smart people have worked hard to make it relatively easy to install things that aren't included in the 'distro'.

Second thing is that your favorite programs may not work on Linux. There's likely a substitute that works almost as well (and sometimes better), but it's not the same. If you need one particular program, things may not go as planned. Most games won't work (though several manufacturers are releasing Linux versions). If you just use the computer for email, web browsing and writing the occasional paper, most distros have everything you need.

Internet security in Linux is basically the same as for Windows: Don't open suspicious email (and don't even thing about running programs sent by people you don't know), use a firewall/router to access the internet, and run updates regularly.

Final big thing is that Linux hardware support isn't near what Windows has. This is mostly because Windows has such a large majority of the end-user systems. End users don't have the skills to fix problems that server administrators do, so the hardware companies spend a lot more time developing slick interfaces for the end users. Fortunately, most manufacturers have at least some people working in Linux drivers, and Linux has an army of volunteers to make up for some of the rest. This generally means that the newest hardware and the oldest hardware don't have much support, but things that are 'so last year' generally work.

So, as you already seem to know, you have to be careful about which hardware will work. Luckily, many of those people that make the distros know this is a problem, and have a solution for it: The Live CD. This is a CD that will boot the computer in Linux, without needing to install anything to the hard drive. You can see if your hardware works easily, and even get to play with the user interface and programs for that distro, all without making any permanent changes to your system.

So, you need to know where to get a Live CD? Here's a list. Personally, I like Knoppix and Suse. Ubuntu is supposed to be good, but I haven't used it.

One last word: Linux has excellent support, but it's generally only available online. There isn't a single company you can call when things stop working (unless you buy it from a company like Red Hat that will sell you support directly). On the upside, things rarely 'stop working' they either work forever, or never start. As long as you can get to the internet, you can find help, though it is sometimes cryptic and slow in coming.

 

[AgeGap]

Thanks for the reply. I have a live CD that came with a Magazine and it is a Ubuntu one, this will be superceded soon though. I tend not to play games and don't have a designated graphics card. My computer is very low-spec.
OpenOffice, Firefox and Thunderbird should cover 99.9% of my computing needs. I have spoken to another Ubuntu user, who built his own computer, and he seems pleased with the result. He uses Opera, Zone Alarm and AdAware.
Is an anti virus/internet security suite necessary and available? Everything seems geared for Windows. I have had a quick go on a Asus ieee (Linux) and this was very impressive.
Anyone have any recommends? Forums, Websites, books or UK magazines?

 

[Nick Bogaerts]

Thanks for the reply. I have a live CD that came with a Magazine and it is a Ubuntu one, this will be superceded soon though.

Ubuntu is currently my favourite desktop distribution. Which you choose is mostly a matter of taste. I'm not going into the debate of which is superior to which other. Suffice to say Ubuntu is one of the most popular and consequently best supported distro out there. You can just try to run the live CD (pop in in the tray, tell the machine to boot from CD) and play around for a bit, see if you like it. Bear in mind that they do take longer to load than when installed on the HD.

If you're happy, then make a backup of all your documents and everything else you want to keep, and run the installer. Make sure you have the latest version though, it'll save you from having to make an upgrade after installation. Ubuntu is currently on version 7.10 "Gutsy Gibbon". They have a six-month release schedule, the next version, 8.04 "Hardy Heron" coming in April.

I wouldn't bother with a dual-boot. You're unlikely to need Windows anymore, it will just be a waste of space.

I tend not to play games and don't have a designated graphics card. My computer is very low-spec.

That's OK. Linux usually isn't the resource hog MS Windows Vista is, and the latest releases are fine even on older machines.

Is an anti virus/internet security suite necessary and available? Everything seems geared for Windows. I have had a quick go on a Asus ieee (Linux) and this was very impressive.

No. I wouldn't worry about an anti-virus, you don't need one. Unix systems aren't prone to viruses the way Windows is which has to battle with fifteen year old architectural mistakes. There is an
anti-virus available (clam-AV), but you can do without. As for firewalls, the Linux kernel has one embedded (iptables), so all you need is a front-end interface to it (e.g. Firestarter). Ubuntu doesn't have one installed by default, but you can always fetch it from the software repositiories.

Anyone have any recommends? Forums, Websites, books or UK magazines?

The major distributions have good documentation by now. Ubuntu's can be found at https://help.ubuntu.com/, and the support forum is http://ubuntuforums.org/

 

[~enigma~]

When Microsoft stop issuing updates to XP, in what I have read to be early 2009, I am thinking of running some sort of Linux. Are there any pratfalls to lookout for? What should I do about internet security? How do I find out if Linux will even run on my computer? Anything I should be aware of?

Thanks
AgeGap

Easiest way to find out is get a LiveCD of Ubuntu. Thay way you can try it from CD to see if you like it. If you do, you can install from the CD but that requires partitions for Linux but there is a program called WUBI that will install Ubuntu as a virtual disk in windows so no partition is necessary. As far as security...well, you can forget the windows mindset. First key to security is an OS without a million grand canyon sized holes.

 

[~enigma~]

The first thing you should be aware of is that Linux is just the operating system. In order to make it work like your current system, there are a lot of other software packages you'll need to install. For instance, Linux doesn't include any way to draw 'windows' for an application, or use the mouse in any way.

Really?!?!? Then I am either very lucky or a genius since I am using Linux and I never installed anything to use my mouse, monitor, sound card, printer, modem, wireless connection, networking or drawing windows. You are correct about the software he is used to not being available for linux but there are free and in some cases better software capable of doing the same tasks.

 

[~enigma~]

Thanks for the reply. I have a live CD that came with a Magazine and it is a Ubuntu one, this will be superceded soon though. I tend not to play games and don't have a designated graphics card. My computer is very low-spec.
OpenOffice, Firefox and Thunderbird should cover 99.9% of my computing needs. I have spoken to another Ubuntu user, who built his own computer, and he seems pleased with the result. He uses Opera, Zone Alarm and AdAware.
Is an anti virus/internet security suite necessary and available? Everything seems geared for Windows. I have had a quick go on a Asus ieee (Linux) and this was very impressive.
Anyone have any recommends? Forums, Websites, books or UK magazines?

Forum - http://ubuntuforums.org/index.php

Magazine - http://fullcirclemagazine.org/

 

[~enigma~]

Ubuntu doesn't have one installed by default, but you can always fetch it from the software repositiories.

Sure does. Hardy has UFW by default.

 

[Charlie Monoxide]

I'm running a Linux box using Ubuntu 7.10. Very stable and robust. I was able to easily setup a small network with my XP and Ubuntu easily recognized the NTFS SATA drive I slapped in.

My only compaint is that Firefox looks like crap compared to Firefox on XP. I'm sure it's a font issue but I've been busy reconfiguring my XP box (quad core upgrade).

This is a machine I leave on most of the time. My other box is XP and it gets put to bed nightly ....

Charlie (fool for computers) Monoxide

 

[GodMark2]

Really?!?!? Then I am either very lucky or a genius since I am using Linux and I never installed anything to use my mouse, monitor, sound card, printer, modem, wireless connection, networking or drawing windows. You are correct about the software he is used to not being available for linux but there are free and in some cases better software capable of doing the same tasks.

Or you didn't install "Linux" but rather installed on of the "distros" I mentioned in the next sentence (like Ubuntu, or Red Hat, or Suse, or Knoppix). Many (if not most) distros of Linux include a window manager of some type, and nearly all of those include mouse support and detection. However, there are MANY window managers that can be used, but they all use the same Linux. Some are specifically designed for mouseless use (Xmonad, Ion).

So you're probably not a genius, you just let the geniuses that build the distros do the hard work for you.

My computer is very low-spec.
OpenOffice, Firefox and Thunderbird should cover 99.9% of my computing needs.

Linux is almost certainly fine for you.

Is an anti virus/internet security suite necessary and available? Everything seems geared for Windows.

Nick touched on this, but he used the unfortunate "Unix systems aren't prone to viruses the way Windows is". It is more correct to say that most current viruses affect Windows systems and not Linux. Many people (myself sometimes included) like to see this as solely a result of Microsoft incompetence, but it's not the whole story.

From Linux.com:

So Linux is bulletproof? No. Bulletproof is one of the last stages of drunkenness, not a state of security. Linux users, like users on every operating system, must always be aware of security issues. They must act intelligently to keep their systems safe and secure. They should not run programs with root privileges when they are not required, and they should apply security patches regularly.

Linux is made by people. People make mistakes. But, Linux can't try and pretend the mistake doesn't exist and blame it all on the user, unlike some monopolistic software companies. So, Linux patches are usually fast enough that viruses can't get much mileage, and will likely be rendered inert by the next phase of patches. There is even a partial list of Linux viruses. Of course, it should be noted that it is POSSIBLE to fit a list of Linux viruses on a single wiki page.

 

[six7s]

Thanks AgeGap! A v interesting - and timely - thread!

It is more correct to say that most current viruses affect Windows systems and not Linux

I have long had a hunch* that it would be more accurate to say that (in early 2007) most current viruses are targeted at Windows systems - simply because malicious virus writers (#@*$@^&#@ers!!!) are like graffiti vandals - rather than hide their 'work' under a bushel, they aim at high profile targets and, if/when gazillions of XP users migrate to Linux (to avoid moving to Vista), then Linux will become a much more 'attractive' target

* A quick Google reveals that maybe my hunch is based on a myth...

The Register » Security » Anti-Virus » Linux vs. Windows Viruses

By Scott Granneman, SecurityFocus
Monday 6th October 2003

<snip/>

The only reason Microsoft software is the target of so many viruses is because it is so widely used! Why, if Linux or Mac OS X was as popular as Windows, there would be just as many viruses written for those platforms!"

Of course, it's not just "regular folks" on mailing lists who share this opinion. Businesspeople have expressed similar attitudes ... including ones who work for anti-virus companies. Jack Clarke, European product manager at McAfee, said, "So we will be seeing more Linux viruses as the OS becomes more common and popular."

Mr. Clarke is wrong.

Sure, there are Linux viruses. But let's compare the numbers. According to Dr. Nic Peeling and Dr Julian Satchell's Analysis of the Impact of Open Source Software (note: the link is to a 135 kb PDF file):

"There are [2003] about 60,000 viruses known for Windows, 40 or so for the Macintosh, about 5 for commercial Unix versions, and perhaps 40 for Linux. Most of the Windows viruses are not important, but many hundreds have caused widespread damage. Two or three of the Macintosh viruses were widespread enough to be of importance. None of the Unix or Linux viruses became widespread - most were confined to the laboratory."

So there are far fewer viruses for Mac OS X and Linux. It's true that those two operating systems do not have monopoly numbers, though in some industries they have substantial numbers of users. But even if Linux becomes the dominant desktop computing platform, and Mac OS X continues its growth in businesses and homes, these Unix-based OS's will never experience all of the problems we're seeing now with email-borne viruses and worms in the Microsoft world. Why?

<snip/>

Source

Note: although that article dates from 2003, the Register published at least 10 of his articles in 2006/07

Of course, it should be noted that it is POSSIBLE to fit a list of Linux viruses on a single wiki page.

For how long?

 

[AgeGap]

I have downloaded and burnt a Ubuntu 7.10 disc and booted it. Never done this before, switched the computer on and, as per the instructions on the screen, kept pressing F12. This led to a screen which gave options where to boot from. I tried to use the mouse to select an option. D'oh. Used the arrow keys and selected the boot from CD/DVD option. Although slow (LiveCD) I got to the chocolate coloured screen and a few icons. Mouse working OK, tried to select firefox then I got an error message with no further info. Not given up yet though.

 

[Jekyll]

There is even a partial list of Linux viruses. Of course, it should be noted that it is POSSIBLE to fit a list of Linux viruses on a single wiki page.

Does any one know how many of them have been found in the wild?

 

[~enigma~]

Or you didn't install "Linux" but rather installed on of the "distros" I mentioned in the next sentence (like Ubuntu, or Red Hat, or Suse, or Knoppix). Many (if not most) distros of Linux include a window manager of some type, and nearly all of those include mouse support and detection. However, there are MANY window managers that can be used, but they all use the same Linux. Some are specifically designed for mouseless use (Xmonad, Ion).

So you're probably not a genius, you just let the geniuses that build the distros do the hard work for you.

So now it comes out.You are one of those people that think windows is the answer to the problems of the world. You couldn't be further from the truth so go on in your blissful ignorance.

 

[~enigma~]

For how long?

If Linux had as many gaping holes in the OS as windows, there would be alot of virus and worms written for Linux. After windows was around as long as the various flavors of Linux, were there only so few virus that they fit on a one page list? Different OS needs to be looked at differently.

 

[~enigma~]

I have downloaded and burnt a Ubuntu 7.10 disc and booted it. Never done this before, switched the computer on and, as per the instructions on the screen, kept pressing F12. This led to a screen which gave options where to boot from. I tried to use the mouse to select an option. D'oh. Used the arrow keys and selected the boot from CD/DVD option. Although slow (LiveCD) I got to the chocolate coloured screen and a few icons. Mouse working OK, tried to select firefox then I got an error message with no further info. Not given up yet though.

LiveCD is slow due to the access of your CD drive otherwise it should be fine.

 

[~enigma~]

Linux is made by people. People make mistakes. But, Linux can't try and pretend the mistake doesn't exist and blame it all on the user, unlike some monopolistic software companies. So, Linux patches are usually fast enough that viruses can't get much mileage, and will likely be rendered inert by the next phase of patches. There is even a partial list of Linux viruses. Of course, it should be noted that it is POSSIBLE to fit a list of Linux viruses on a single wiki page.

Tell me, what damage could a virus do on a Linux machine when you are running as a user and not as root?

 

[Nick Bogaerts]

Nick touched on this, but he used the unfortunate "Unix systems aren't prone to viruses the way Windows is". It is more correct to say that most current viruses affect Windows systems and not Linux. Many people (myself sometimes included) like to see this as solely a result of Microsoft incompetence, but it's not the whole story.

If Linux had as many gaping holes in the OS as windows, there would be alot of virus and worms written for Linux. After windows was around as long as the various flavors of Linux, were there only so few virus that they fit on a one page list? Different OS needs to be looked at differently.

Malware writers are increasingly financially motivated, and they will always look at the softest targets There's a joke going round that contrary to popular belief, the most powerful supercomputer in the world in fact runs Windows: it's the Storm botnet^WP, and there's some truth to it. Windows is the most cost-effective platform for a spammer to hijack. There are several reasons for this:

(a) There are lots of windows machines

(b) Many of them are in the hands of naive users: most Linux systems out there are run either by enthusiasts, or servers with a real sysadmin. It's more difficult to hijack a system kept up to date.

(c) As I mentioned earlier, Windows has serious, and I believe fatal, architectural flaws harking back to the pre-internet days of Windows 95 and OS/2 Warp. GNU/Linux is based on Unix, which was designed for mainframes with time-sharing in mind, not a single-user OS for an unconnected microcomputer, which made proper user permission and privilege control designed from the start, not hastily slapped on top of an ageing kernel.

(d) As Whitfield Diffie^WP said, the secret to proper security is less reliance on secrets. Microsoft practice Security by obscurity, and they can't change that without throwing their whole business model through the window. Free software isn't a silver bullet, but you can guarantee that the most popular packages have been scrutinised much more than MS's. The infamous SQL Slammer^WP Worm targeted MS SQL server, not the far more popular MySQL, because security-wise, it's weaker. And it'll always be weaker, because free software is better.

If you want security, there's no better system than OpenBSD. It's not perfect ("Only two remote holes in the default install, in more than 10 years!", as they say), but it's damn close. And that's because there's no software written more securely, and more audited than OpenBSD.

Again, it's not that MS programmers are incompetent, it's that they have a different demographics, a different history, and quite frankly, different priorities. And that's why it is, and will remain, the security hole that it is.

 

[Nick Bogaerts]

I have downloaded and burnt a Ubuntu 7.10 disc and booted it. Never done this before, switched the computer on and, as per the instructions on the screen, kept pressing F12. This led to a screen which gave options where to boot from. I tried to use the mouse to select an option. D'oh. Used the arrow keys and selected the boot from CD/DVD option. Although slow (LiveCD) I got to the chocolate coloured screen and a few icons. Mouse working OK, tried to select firefox then I got an error message with no further info. Not given up yet though.

Sorry, I got distracted by a side issue. It might be worth splitting the thread so that we don't clutter yours with a different debate. What was the error message you got? The more details you give the better chance you have of finding someone to help.

 

[~enigma~]

Malware writers are increasingly financially motivated, and they will always look at the softest targets There's a joke going round that contrary to popular belief, the most powerful supercomputer in the world in fact runs Windows: it's the Storm botnet^WP, and there's some truth to it. Windows is the most cost-effective platform for a spammer to hijack. There are several reasons for this:

(a) There are lots of windows machines

(b) Many of them are in the hands of naive users: most Linux systems out there are run either by enthusiasts, or servers with a real sysadmin. It's more difficult to hijack a system kept up to date.

(c) As I mentioned earlier, Windows has serious, and I believe fatal, architectural flaws harking back to the pre-internet days of Windows 95 and OS/2 Warp. GNU/Linux is based on Unix, which was designed for mainframes with time-sharing in mind, not a single-user OS for an unconnected microcomputer, which made proper user permission and privilege control designed from the start, not hastily slapped on top of an ageing kernel.

(d) As Whitfield Diffie^WP said, the secret to proper security is less reliance on secrets. Microsoft practice Security by obscurity, and they can't change that without throwing their whole business model through the window. Free software isn't a silver bullet, but you can guarantee that the most popular packages have been scrutinised much more than MS's. The infamous SQL Slammer^WP Worm targeted MS SQL server, not the far more popular MySQL, because security-wise, it's weaker. And it'll always be weaker, because free software is better.

If you want security, there's no better system than OpenBSD. It's not perfect ("Only two remote holes in the default install, in more than 10 years!", as they say), but it's damn close. And that's because there's no software written more securely, and more audited than OpenBSD.

Again, it's not that MS programmers are incompetent, it's that they have a different demographics, a different history, and quite frankly, different priorities. And that's why it is, and will remain, the security hole that it is.

First post I ever nominated. Congrats