Re: Response to Winux/Lion/etc.

[Atul Chitnis <achitnis@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 29 Mar 2001, Arun Sharma wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 29, 2001 at 02:29:01PM +0530, Atul Chitnis wrote:
> > By default, one logs into a Linux/Unix system as a normal user
> > (with very few privileges), and only becomes superuser when the
> > need arises for system management. In fact, normal users do not
> > usually log in as a superuser for an entirely different reason -
> > they don't even have the superuser password.
>
> And how is it different from Win2k ?

Well, you have to be a Windows user to understand that one ;-)

Permissions are the bane of the Windows world - they are not tolerated.
The concept of more than one person using the machine is usually alien to
these users.

In almost all workstation cases (NT/w2k), I find users logged in with
privileges equal to administrator level, if not as the administrator
him/herself. Why? Because being logged in as an ordinary user limits what
they can do on the machine (according to them).

Even otherwise, things are no better. In the words of Vinod Unny (fanatic
pro-Windows guru for PCQ, who is just beginning to switch to the bright
side since discovering the power of Linux ;-) "Default permissions in
Windows suck". And *defaults* is what most people work with. I have yet to
see a Windows user who would increase permissions on his machine to save
the user from himself!

> Back in the days when I was a flaming Linux head, I ran into arguments
> with him on similar topics.

I don't know what to make of this - you make it sound bad that someone is
passionate about his cause. It also makes it sound like there is a
decreased level of belief in (the relevance of) Linux on your side.

Atul


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------
Atul Chitnis       | achitnis@xxxxxxxxxxx (PGP:6011BCB8)
Exocore Consulting | http://www.exocore.com
Bangalore, India   | +91 (80) 3440397 Fax +91 (80) 3341137
----------------------------------------------------------