Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Mindovermaster

Linux, as a Whole

334 posts in this topic

Try doing SSH in Windows. Yes, it can be done, but not natively.

Not that I care about these inane ****ing contests, but what do you mean by this? Several of my Windows servers have SSH daemons running. Not via Cygwin, not a virtual machine, some sort of compatibility layer or whatever you're quoting as "non native". Same goes for clients, which there are plenty of. Doing SSH in Windows is very easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do tell me, how is that done? you cannot, as I am aware type "ssh john@123.456.789" in the command line, You need software to do so. A GUI.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I care about these inane ****ing contests, but what do you mean by this? Several of my Windows servers have SSH daemons running. Not via Cygwin, not a virtual machine, some sort of compatibility layer or whatever you're quoting as "non native". Same goes for clients, which there are plenty of. Doing SSH in Windows is very easy.

I think he means out of the box (already built in) without having to install some additional software such as putty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do tell me, how is that done? you cannot, as I am aware type "ssh john@123.456.789" in the command line, You need software to do so. A GUI.

Just a shot in the dark but.. install a SSH client? Quite a number to choose from, and surprisingly some of them are even (gasp) console based.

I think he means out of the box (already built in) without having to install some additional software such as putty.

Ah. And that makes Linux better how exactly? Considering you're still installing a bunch of third party software.. just because it was bundled with whatever flavor distro? I can just as easily create a Windows ISO that has whatever terminal client on it and say it's built into Windows too. (Short version, so what?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a shot in the dark but.. install a SSH client? Quite a number to choose from, and surprisingly some of them are even (gasp) console based.

Ah. And that makes Linux better how exactly? Considering you're still installing a bunch of third party software.. just because it was bundled with whatever flavor distro? I can just as easily create a Windows ISO that has whatever terminal client on it and say it's built into Windows too. (Short version, so what?)

Yes you may say that but with Linux it is free...

Even the "Free" Putty says if you use it for a Business then you have to pay a fee to use it.

Pay a licence fee and if you are using one in a business and not paying a fee than you could be sued.

That is the point -- most are Free for home use.

I think that is what the other people were trying to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sudo apt-get install SSH-server, you are DONE.

Bunch of 3rd party? Sounds like Windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why use SSH on Windows? Really, we have evolved, we use the GUI, we have Remote Desktop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is the point -- most are Free for home use. I think that is what the other people were trying to say.

Fair enough, but many are free (or even open source) for Windows, or if you're that into it you can always write your own or even port something over. There's more than just PuTTY out there.

Sudo apt-get install SSH-server, you are DONE.

Click click, you are DONE. (Or if you get off on CLI, run it from a console.) So what?

Bunch of 3rd party? Sounds like Windows.

Erm ever actually look at what's installed in whatever distro you're using? A lot of third party in there too, sorry. Just because you can apt-get something doesn't make it an official part of Linux.

Why use SSH on Windows? Really, we have evolved, we use the GUI, we have Remote Desktop.

Handy for some tasks, especially when you're on a device that doesn't have RDP capability or is just slow enough to make RDP painful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm ever actually look at what's installed in whatever distro you're using? A lot of third party in there too, sorry. Just because you can apt-get something doesn't make it an official part of Linux.

Tell me, what isn't 3rd party when you talk Linux?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tell me, what isn't 3rd party when you talk Linux?

The GNU toolchain and the Linux kernel. That's "Linux". If you need a primer, might want to read up about it over on the GNU page.

http://www.gnu.org/g...ux-and-gnu.html

Slapping something together and putting it on a disc/ISO/repository doesn't make it officially a part of it. Convenient, yes. Considering that the majority of that stuff is done by, well, third parties.. yea. It's third party. It's not a dirty word, and frankly a little puzzled why you even brought it up... I was just looking for clarification about your "non native" comment, you're the one dragging this in to another stupid this-vs-that argument, when if you'd bother to go back a page or two, I even mention I happily run both. (Wellllllll actually three, I personally prefer BSD Unix over Linux, but hey, that's the beauty about choice.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... why don't some of the companies that sell their version of this OS do what Microsoft did... make software to run on the OS that they are selling?

Seems like that would be the ticket... as long as they keep it cheaper than going with Bill's OS and the software available for his party

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah Linux. The joys of my OS fundementals class.

And by joy, I mean complete waste of time.

Alas, I also tried Ubuntu a few times,

just by myself. Boredom.

Linux is like a Wordpress blog without content.

You think the default theme is ugly, find a better one,

and then tweak the PHP and CSS a bit to look better.

You feel good about yourself - you got something that looks decent,

personalized, OS.

There is still no content on your damn blog.

And this is what I realized. Sure I wasted hours making Linux (Ubuntu 64) look nice.

Now what? I have no use for this.

The file structure of Linux does confuse me.

Windows is simple.

For example, you will find programs in "Program Files"

Or user Date in "Users"

I still have no idea where to find anything in Linux though.

I just Google it.

"/" means a subdirectory of something

like C:/Program Files/ or www.mywebsite.com/forum

But alas, that is just the surface,

I bring you the browser wars.

What did IE9, and epiecially IE10, do differently from Firefox or Chrome or Opera?

Full blow hardware acceleration.

What is the alternative of "Direct2D" for OpenGL?

Oh need I mention that IE10 not only renders everything using the GPU,

it also decodes and renders HTML video using the GPU?

You may say that there is some OpenGL thing which renders text or something,

but alas, how stable is this on Linux drivers?

Then there is Video. Windows has WMP. Works fine OOTB.

Also DXVA2 native. 0% CPU for 1080p video - full HWA

There is also MPC:HC - full HWA.

Then there is the Inteface. That thing Ubuntu 12 has now.

Still got fully schooled by Windows 8 interface.

And hey, I agree with commentators,

W8 did not go far enough and has some inconsistencies in GUI.

It still blew my mind.

I cannot use Ubuntu 10 / 12 like I can Windows GUI - fast, without getting a headache.

Then development tools.

Aside from the fact that Windows is a breeze to setup for dual monitors.

And Windows doesn't have issue detecting your refresh rate.

Linux cannot deliver.

Also in Windows, you do not need to opt-in to proprietary drivers.

It just kinda detects it and installs drivers.

And then, just the question,

how do I max out my hardware on Linux?

GPU drivers suck, no full HWA for browsers, no good games, no good modeling software,

no photoshop.

I mean, for all intensive purposes, you buy good hardware to use it.

I see so many people have these hardcore computers, with Linux on them.

I mean there is some cogranite dissonance there.

Then there is stability.

Windows 7 is incredibly stable.

Can't say the same thing about an OS that gives me crackling sound.

I think I am going to end this saying that

maybe in Linux it is actually faster to do things through the Terminal (aside from a bunch of things that can ONLY be done though the terminal)

Windows, on the other hand, the interface is so simple, so polished, so ingeneously designed,

that Windows users do not know what the f-k a command line interface is.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the "Free" Putty says if you use it for a Business then you have to pay a fee to use it.

Pay a licence fee and if you are using one in a business and not paying a fee than you could be sued.

That is the point -- most are Free for home use.

I think that is what the other people were trying to say.

Absolutely wrong here.

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/licence.html

"In particular, anybody (even companies) can use PuTTY without restriction (even for commercial purposes) and owe nothing to me or anybody else."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most actual Linux users really don't care if Linux becomes the favoured desktop OS. Whether it's #1 or not, we're happy with our PCs running our OS of choice.

This.

Seriously, this.

Even more pathetic are the Apple tards who're constantly looking for a way to mock linux. I'm sure each of us knows at least one iTard like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using Linux from 2-3 years as secondary OS, I like using it and messing with it to have that geeky feel. But i agree with most of users here, it relies too much on command lines. I have used Ubuntu, fedora, Mint etc but still command line use is there. Which is annoying sometimes when you have to do some simple tasks. Right now i have Arch Setup in VM ( which was pain in arse to set up ) and Elementary OS in VM. Rest i am mostly on Windows as all my games, softwares are available for it. Cant jump to Linux fully until Adobe Suite, Autodesk Suite, and all my CG applications are available for Linux.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i just cant stand Linux b/c you have to use the command line to do anything with it. perhaps the Distros have evolved since a few years ago when i was using Fedora and Ubuntu. It takes me 20x longer to find or do something in Linux than Windows. i find myself constantly in linux forums looking for the stupid 15 commands i have to type to find the buried conf file. Then you have to open your cmd line file editor and manually mod it. why? why would anyone have to do this in 2012?

then there's the perpetual issue of installing software. sure, the GET stuff is convenient, but not when you have to download a .tar.gz file from a website. good luck installing it! you have to unzip, run 'make /install' and watch the command line (once again) go to work. why cant i just download an exe, double click it and click install from a nice GUI?

I think you summed it up pretty good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys for once can we not do the usual Windows VS Linux? That is shallow thinking.

I use both and I like both and I see nothing wrong with using both.

I have been meaning to try Elementary OS, maybe over Christmas and New Years I will install it in my VM and check it out. I like trying new things.

I did check out a video on the new Ubuntu language to build Apps, "Quickly" is the name of the language/app builder. I did not know it was mainly built in python and used the tool builder like Visual Basic (can't remember the name of the tool), it's okay, but nothing that great to write home about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you may say that but with Linux it is free...

Even the "Free" Putty says if you use it for a Business then you have to pay a fee to use it.

Pay a licence fee and if you are using one in a business and not paying a fee than you could be sued.

That is the point -- most are Free for home use.

I think that is what the other people were trying to say.

So, who is going to check this? The FBI.... That was like Netscape saying oh only use this for home use don't use it for business and how many used it for business without paying? I would guesstimate a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, who is going to check this? The FBI.... That was like Netscape saying oh only use this for home use don't use it for business and how many used it for business without paying? I would guesstimate a lot.

Hahaha true but for the record you can use PuTTY free of charge for personal AND commercial usage with absolutely no limitations whatsoever, that guy is just trying to spread FUD. As many people have said, if you use Linux, you're going to have to hit up terminal at least daily. When I'm on Linux, the terminal never closes. The thing with Linux is that it was never designed to handle a GUI, this is one of its biggest shortcomings. Windows and the NT kernel (OSX as well to agree) have kernels built for a mouse/keyboard/digitiser to interact directly with a GUI object. Linux has it so your mouse interacts with the kernel which is interacting with code, the GUI being a layer above this. There are many extra layers in Linux which cause it to be bogged down whenever trying to do anything with graphics. As I said before, I have every linux distro know to man on HDDs and Live CD/DVDs but not for getting real work done (only pentesting/hacking). Windows works, looks good and is easy to do things even when you have no idea what's going on. Other things that make it unstoppable: software support, hardware support, the entire network/graphics/sound/IO stack, GPU accelerated tasks such as WDDM and RDP, user/noob friendly whilst still retaining full power user functionality over the OS through CMD and PowerShell. The list just keeps going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why use SSH on Windows? Really, we have evolved, we use the GUI, we have Remote Desktop.

Apparently you've never heard of PowerShell and all the CLI stuff you need to do with AD. There are MANY tasks that that don't have a GUI for. Even with Remote Desktop, you still need to use the CLI, why not just do it remotely?

For the people talking about hardware support, Linux actually has more out of the box than Windows.

As for the package management I can update EVERY program on the system at once.

I totally agree it's not for everyone, but why do these threads always become a bitch session. If you're just going to put something down, don't post. You're not adding to a discussion at that point. Just move on and troll another thread. Some people have valid points, but they're also adding to the discussion, not turning into crap.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahaha true but for the record you can use PuTTY free of charge for personal AND commercial usage with absolutely no limitations whatsoever, that guy is just trying to spread FUD. As many people have said, if you use Linux, you're going to have to hit up terminal at least daily. When I'm on Linux, the terminal never closes. The thing with Linux is that it was never designed to handle a GUI, this is one of its biggest shortcomings. Windows and the NT kernel (OSX as well to agree) have kernels built for a mouse/keyboard/digitiser to interact directly with a GUI object. Linux has it so your mouse interacts with the kernel which is interacting with code, the GUI being a layer above this. There are many extra layers in Linux which cause it to be bogged down whenever trying to do anything with graphics. As I said before, I have every linux distro know to man on HDDs and Live CD/DVDs but not for getting real work done (only pentesting/hacking). Windows works, looks good and is easy to do things even when you have no idea what's going on. Other things that make it unstoppable: software support, hardware support, the entire network/graphics/sound/IO stack, GPU accelerated tasks such as WDDM and RDP, user/noob friendly whilst still retaining full power user functionality over the OS through CMD and PowerShell. The list just keeps going.

I was not spreading FUD there are many programs that I run into in business that clearly state when starting up. Free for Home use and when you agree to the terms of use it states that you must pay a licence fee to use otherwise.

Okay then why did one of the people I work with have to Buy it for the Iphone then ?? And also had to pay extra to use it for business then??

Normal single server connection usage was 4.99$ for the application for home use with a 5$ business licence to connect to multiple machines.

The point is - software such as Spybot Search and Destroy is free for personal usage, so is ccleaner, and even Malewarebytes. But for corporate use they require the purchase of a licence.

Software in linux is freely distributed with no limitations. The only charges for distributions is with the provided tech support.

That is the point and I am getting tiered of getting accused of spreading FUD... when all I did was try to explain why someone else suggested something. If you would have read my posts you would have realized that instead of just reading the latter.

And yes I did state Putty was free for personal use -- I did not know they changed the terms for I have not used it since 2002.

Putty for linux/unix has always been free for business use but the Windows version has not always been which really does not matter now since it is free now.

What is it with Linux crybabies not being able to stand criticism? "If you're just going to put something down, don't post." :rolleyes: Oh I see, so basically you want to hear opinion that only suits your world view. How about you type a bunch of text in notepad and stare at it. That would be exactly what you want. :rolleyes: Why is it that anything Linux zealots don't agree with is considered trolling or crap? :rolleyes:

No actually what is happening is that people (not saying you) are still thinking that Linux is like the old command line which it is not. That would be like me saying -- Oh that windows it uses tree commands and looks like this:

win21.gif

Which is what people are doing for Linux. Instead of trying it again.. Oh I tried it 5 years ago and it was nothing but command line and was not for me. Which is brought up over and over again.

that is why they attack peoples opinions.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not spreading FUD there are many programs that I run into in business that clearly state when starting up.

You claimed that PuTTY is not free of charge for commercial use, that's exactly spreading fud as PuTTY is licensed under the MIT license...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You claimed that PuTTY is not free of charge for commercial use, that's exactly spreading fud as PuTTY is licensed under the MIT license...

The unix/linux version is and always has been free.. the Windows implementation has not always been free

The Windows version did not fall under the MIT license since it did not use the same code.

But I have not used it for Windows since 2002 where it was a nominal please donate then is now free so that does not matter now.

It has since been released so it will be included under those terms to be free to use by anyone and anywhere.

But then again-- I made an assumption based on MY usage and I was proved wrong. Just as if people would try Linux again will be surprised instead of saying well I tried it 3 years ago.

You see I paid the fee to use that program back then but now there is no fee and it is free. Where I made the assumption it was still pay for business use which is what people are doing for linux. Making the assumption that one will have to use command line... which one does not. That was the linux of yesterday..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No actually what is happening is that people (not saying you) are still thinking that Linux is like the old command line which it is not. That would be like me saying -- Oh that windows it uses tree commands and looks like this:

<<IMAGE>>

Which is what people are doing for Linux. Instead of trying it again.. Oh I tried it 5 years ago and it was nothing but command line and was not for me. Which is brought up over and over again.

that is why they attack peoples opinions.

I agree that uninformed criticism is annoying, but this was not the case for the most part in this thread, yet you have zealots popping their forehead veins whenever someone posts something they don't like. Grow up people, people are entitled to post whatever they like as they see fit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've played with Linux often enough, on and off, and have used it for good stretches of time, but I always find myself back on Windows.

Nothing really wrong with it, and I even think graphics seem to look better under than Windows. Used to be my excuse for not switching was no support for the 2 old scanners I had, but don't use those anymore and the 2 I currently have do work in Linux.

I'm about due for another go round of it though, now that you mention it! I usually use Zenwak, http://zenwalk.org/ myself. It has EVERYTHING work out of the box way better than Ubuntu also!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.