Over the past few years there’ve been a number of attempts to make computers more accessible to people in developing markets. The OLPC project aimed to bring low-cost laptops to the world. Google and Facebook are attempting to make internet access more affordable. And Raspberry Pi‘s $35 computers show that it doesn’t take a lot of money to deliver a (somewhat) functional PC.
Now a startup called Endless has a new approach. The team has developed a reasonably low-cost desktop computer that can sell for as little as $169. But what really makes the Endless Computer unusual is Endless OS operating system which is designed to be simple, powerful, and capable of providing value whether you have an internet connection or not.
The developers are running a Kickstarter campaign for Endless Computers and plan to ship the first systems in June.
Endless has already developed the computers and the operating system (which is based on Fedora Linux and the GNOME desktop environment), and according to an article in VentureBeat the team plans to target Mexico and Gautemala at launch before expanding in Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East. The Kickstarter campaign is mostly designed to raise awareness (and a money for a marketing budget).
The computer itself is a funny looking machine with a red bottom and an eggshell-like plastic dome on top. The PC features an Intel Celeron N2807 Bay Trail dual-core processor, 2GB of RAM, one USB 3.0 port, two USB 2.0 ports, a Gigabit Ethernet jack, HDMI and VGA ports, and a stereo headphone jack.
The $169 model features 32GB of eMMC storage. Add $20 and you can get 802.11b/g/n WiFi and Bluetooth 4.0.
For $229 you can get a model with WiFi, Bluetooth, and integrated speaker, and a 500GB hard drive.
You can also pledge $224 or more to give a computer to someone in Guatemala through a partnership with Habitat for Humanity. The money pays for a computer, plus a keyboard, mouse, taxes, shipping, and installation.
You’ll need to supply a keyboard, mouse, and display for each model. In other words, while they certainly aren’t expensive, Endless Computers aren’t necessarily the most affordable devices aimed at developing markets. But it does have a few features that could help it succeed in areas where internet access is spotty at best.
First, the OS comes with over apps pre-loaded, including software that does not require an internet connection. While there’s a web browser, there are also games, reference materials with health, recipe, farming, and other info, educational apps, and more.
The user interface is also designed to be phone-like, featuring an app store, a home screen populated by app icons and a search bar. In many markets smartphones are more common than PCs… but there are some things that are easier to do on a desktop computer than a phone, such as editing spreadsheets or composing documents.
Endless says its operating system “is is not meant to be jailbroken and altered,” but the open source components are accessible via Github, but the Endless app store and some other apps are proprietary. There’s also nothing stopping users from removing Endless OS and replacing it with a different operating system (although that would make Endless sad).
Clearly the idea has resonated with some folks: Endless Computers exceeded it $100,000 crowdfunding goal a few days after the campaign launched. Whether the project will actually succeed in bringing affordable computers to more people around the globe remains to be seen.
This is not the pain point. The pain point is to have to buy a Iphone, and a laptop, and all the compatible infrastructure software service plans etc etc to keep up with the Obasanjos and Singhs, yet still relieve yourself in bushes and inhale plumes of smoke from firewood stoves.
A noble endeavor to be sure but OLPC immediately comes to mind. And I can’t help but wonder what that odd case costs to have made and how practical it is when compared to any number of off the shelf rectangular boxes.
“As simple as a tablet. As powerful as a PC” – well with those specs, it’s as powerful as a tablet. And I can’t remember the last time I bought anti-virus – oh wait, I never have. Since Windows 8 no need to even have to install it.
It’s good to see alternative OSs, but the promotion is all a bit misleading, and I’m not sure this is cheap considering it’s a desktop. You can get more powerful cheap desktops; or consider the Intel Compute Stick where even the Windows version is cheaper. There are also similarly priced but more portable laptops (which don’t need their own keyboard/mouse/display). Or very low cost tablets. So it seems you’re paying a lot just for a bundle of 100 “free” applications.
For places where few people own computers because of the cost, this won’t change anything. For places where people own computers but have little/no Internet connection, why not distribute their apps on a CD? That’s what we used when we had computers with no Internet.
Be far better off going with an established supported OS rather than rely on some small kickstarter company with proprietary anything.
Any number of popular Linux or other systems would be appropriate.
The idea this was ‘intended for use without internet’ seems completely contrary to the idea they spent time on a ‘proprietary’ app store.
The whole thing seems over priced and sounds hinky.
Subufer https://ixbtlabs.com/articles2/jbl-creature/
….
So they want to rip off poor ppl in developing country?
ECS Liva is the same spec and little price. And windows
and msi cubi if i am not rong
Um, you can do better than that by going with a windows computer from a major manufacturer.
windows just add cost, and you cannot customized the metro UI
their aim is for “developing markets”, people with very little resources and knowledge about computer, afaik from their website, and most likely has no internet connection.
plus the os itself provide no educational value to those who wish to learn programing.
i cant imagine using Win OS without internet, but i can imagine Linux without it.
software wise, is a good choice, with useful documentation that cant be matched
hardware wise, for the price…………
i can only say there are better choices available
Am from Tanzania, one among poor countries and windows is dominating here. Anything without windows will be failure.
In schools and universities students learn to use Microsoft software’s like word, excel etc.
$169 is not cheap you can get c2d machine with 2gb ram and 320gb for less than $120 in Tanzania
I will support kick start if they will build PC for under $60, which is possible
seems like you are in heavy influence from Bill Gates’s ‘philanthropy’; if you are all in tobacco, Coca-Cola, junk food, GMOs, etc … it’s not a coincidence. Take care!
So you are among the poorest country and use M$ software. Strange . I would’nt be suprised if you told me that you have cars instead of bicycles… It’s so much “modern”. Smartphones too?
Sending this from Fedora Linux and Midori browser.
I have to ask… Why the hell did you just put the word philanthropy in quotations, when referring to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation? As if their foundation is simply a shill to secretly push Windows on some poor unsuspecting 3rd world citizens. Then you somehow try to tie that into GMO’s?
I have no issues with Linux as an OS, but Windows does account for 90 some odd percent of the worlds workforce. Having a developing nations population learning the same tools that the rest of the globe uses is not part of some grand conspiracy, its logic. You know that word right?
“Then you somehow try to tie that into GMO’s?” you didn’t know that B. Gates was one of the great shareholders of … Monsanto? You know, the ones spreading Agent Orange on millions Vietnamese; at the time it was to bring the great values of democracy to these ignorant people; And now trying to force everyone to feed with GMOs. Bill Gates knows a thing or two about building monopolies! He’s an expert. Hence why he’s on Monsanto’s board.
“a shill to secretly push Windows” alas, not only Windows …
Ask the search engine of your choice (mine is DuckDuckGo) … type “Bill Gates Monsanto” .
“push Windows on some poor unsuspecting 3rd world citizens. ” What i appreciate in your post is that, without knowing, you are describing exactly what B. Gates is trying to do!
Your comment I believe requires no retort, as you managed to make my opinion hold more validity simply by virtue of not being full of crazy.
I believe we need an updated version of Godwin’s Law, which would encompass GMOs, or any other conspiracy quackery.
You want a job, you need to know MS OS and product. That’s what 99% of corporate uses all over the world.
“That’s what 99% of corporate uses all over the world.” happily, that’s not the case, at least in the server world where Windows has no more than 35%. So i have choice. That’s great.
Ummm….. Thats the figure for web servers, not servers in general. Office based servers and managed services servers are still mostly Windows Server OS.
That was also a strawman comparison, as windows as a CLIENT does have near 90% market penetration for corporations. Since we are talking about end users here, clients are what we are discussing.
And Joe from accounting is going to user a linux server OS to do his spreadsheet?
Also, nobody actually knows what the real percentage of OS servers are using in general. There’s no real statistics out there for server OS percentage other than web servers since those are public facing. As far as tech job go, good luck finding a job as IT operation/infrastructure if you only know Windows or Linux. You need to know both and some AS400.
Sorry Comrade, but paying premium for a Marxist philosophy is only for first world hipsters, such as yourself.
People in the developing world want jobs and opportunity, not to be a part of your collective that only works because you live in a fast-decaying welfare state that allows you to do nothing that someone would pay you for and still claim to be doing something people want.
would you treat Google as Marxists because, on their almost one million servers, there’s not one running Windows ?
And i expect you to know that Android is based on … Linux. Without knowing, you have maybe Linux in your pocket !
Infrastructure, backend, and mobile are completely different animals, compared to Consumer or clinet OS’s.
Im a fan of Linux, hell I have a server and two clients running different flavors at my home. I swear by Android… With that said, there is not a single client or consumer based version of Linux I would suggest my non-tech oriented friends or family use as their desktop OS. The linux world is, as funny as it sounds to say, far TOO open. There are way too many ways which people think are the right way to do things.
Linux takes the opposite approach to Apple’s “It just works” (which of course, it doesn’t always), thats too say that Linux has an approach of “Well it works, if you do this, and have this combination of this, this and that. But if you have this over here, then you need to look at doing it this way. Then again, maybe you chose to go with this, in which case you should probably just do this.”
Projects like this aimed at developing nations should not really be targeting the smaller demographic of users that might one day be programmers. It should be targeting as large an audience as possible with the goal of making them relevant in the global market of employability. With that said, that means learning Windows.
You can hate on that all you want, and your opinions may or may not be valid, but simple FACT is that if you are not familiar with windows, you are not an attractive employee. This is not a shrinking number, no matter how often someone toutes about the EU going to Libre or Open Office, WINDOWS STILL DOMINATES.
We likely have at least another 10 years or so of this, just based on the fact that Enterprise moves at a slower rate of adoption.
clearly you dont know any other software beside those supplied by Microsoft.
alternative exist you know, like libreoffice to MS office.
“In schools and universities students learn to use Microsoft software”
if that is the case, migrating to linux is quite simple IMO, its not rocket science.
it just require little adaptation and a little willingness to change.
Wikipedia “Halloween documents”, and you will understand why you and most of the world consumer think that way.
“without windows will be failure”
many company, schools, uni and government has successfully migrated from their MS computer, despite having no previous exp with linux.
based on the data available, that statement is flawed at best
read these wiki to gain a better understanding
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_documents
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt
Let see you try to get a job anywhere with libreoffice instead of MS office on your resume.
Actually a potential employee with LibreOffice tells me that candidate has the initiative to save costs and try something different. Linux users go to the top of the heap in the business unit where I work.
That’s one way to look at it, but it can also suggest the employee is untrained and it could cost more to hire that person… It all depends whether the company needs to be consistent with everyone involved…
Using the same software helps ensure formatting remains the same, makes switching users and still being able to edit, collaborate, etc. can easily be done, and makes it easier to keep everyone consistently trained on the usage of the software without needing for the company to invest additional time and resources to get them there…
Cost of software is only one concern, but IT, cost of training employees, finding tech support options, etc can easily out weigh the cost of the software and make a initial cost saving more costly over time…
There’s also whether the software needs to work with other software and whether you need to import/export or whether the software are directly compatible… Something that is usually lacking in many free alternatives because industry standards usually require a company to be behind the software to provide enough support to make it happen…
While many companies that have switched to Linux do so by making their own custom software… Companies like Pixar, for example, create their own in-house software but that doesn’t help general users and unless you work for that company then training in that software won’t usually help in another company that uses its own in-house software, etc… but that’s why being a fast learner and always willing to learn new things are one of the more consistent best traits you can list in your resume…
Though, listing all sorts of software expertise, both traditional and alternative, in your resume can suggest you’re flexible and for many companies that do their own thing that could be the best trait you can project…
Lol. I need my employees to know to do their job and use excel. Ppl who look down on ms office doesn’t know how to use it. I would pay $1000 easily for excel alone because the amount time it saves.
No-one is better placed to know your business and its needs than you. If Excel does everything you want then look no further.
I don’t look down on any software, much the same as I don’t look down on hammers and power saws. MS Office is a very powerful suite of tools. As a technical writer, Word was my professional staple for 10+ years and I would stack my knowledge of it against anyone out there.
What irks me is when someone makes a blantantly erroneous statement that you need MS Office skills to get a job on the basis of hyperbole. There’s a lot of businesses and governments that have already migrated to LibreOffice, especially in Europe and Microsoft’s recent bickering with the British Government has resulted in MS planning to support Open Document in the next version of Office 365.
For the record, I landed my current job on the basis of my promise to move the company’s technical docs away from Word and believe me when I say that the trend is growing, at least in my profession.
i agree with that many people and client open document is certainly growing.
Despite some concerns, migration are quite smooth. people preffer to stick with hat they know, and once they know MSoffice and libreoffice, many employee do not care either one as long as it doesnt distrupt their work, but as employer or manager, they prefer libre office as it is cheaper, TCO wise.
@CyberGusa as an outside IT consultant & support, it is my job to provide fair trustful (my business require good referral & brand trust to operate) view regarding open source and linux soft against MS products, and provide a solutions, i earn money regarding what they choose. many of the smaller client that is considering upgrading their WIN machine, i need to calculate their TCOs. sooo from XP to windows 8/10 vs linux, even with the cost of training. TCO is cheaper on linux and the saving is accumulative with each updates/upgrade in windows time frame.
cost of support is similar to any MS windows, reason is as a support company, you need to be competitive regardless of software that they use.
soo if you says that TCO is more in linux, it is probably either the linux IT support in your region have no competition,they have no business training running their doomed company or u r misinformed.
compatibility problem issue is negligent in open source software, IMO.
its like pdf format decade ago, u just need to provide the software needed.
In my view it is more propriety software issue, like the docx that breaks backward compatibility, forcing people to upgrade new sofware just to open the file (Embrace, extend and extinguish). So forgive me if i dun share you opinion.
Custom software has nothing to do with why they choose linux, you can also write programe in windows you know. : |
they choose linux only after the weight all of the options. so yet again its a flawed opinion
Cheaper PCs are absolutely a good idea – in this case, if you wanted a low-power Linux box you’d do better to buy a Raspberry Pi 2, it would be adequate for running a browser, etc. and cost less. As for whether or not Linux is a viable choice instead of Windows, I would say that the overall direction for everyone is to use Office 365 or Google Docs / Sheets, which generally work fine in Chrome or Firefox on Linux.
HP Stream 11, $200 on Amazon. More expensive, but it also doesn’t need you to add keyboard, mouse and display; it’s also way more portable and has long battery life. True, you can get cheaper Linux hardware than Windows, but it’s not as big of a difference as it once was with the new low cost licence fees. There is one benefit of Linux – it will work better on a 32GB drive, though an SD card will cheaply take care of that.
You can customize Windows – perhaps not as much as Linux, but I don’t see why that’s the most important issue, and it’s also not something that goes well with people who have little knowledge about computers. Windows may not come with a programming language as standard, but neither do Linux distributions such as Ubuntu (I’ve no idea about Endless).
I don’t see why Windows is any different to Linux when not connected? The only advantage here is that they load it with applications, but that’s specific to Endless. The reason why most Windows OEMs don’t do this is because people will moan about it being bloatware…
I think they made a poor choice in terms of hardware. intel computex stick cost ~100USD, many chinese online retail sells 100++usd for a 10inch atom quadcore 32GB SSD, 2GBRAM with wifi&BT, i belive a tablet is a better choice than a nettop. raspberry pi2 is a great alternative too. you can supply 3 rpi+ peripherals for every nettop. so ya it is extremely a bad move objectively and financially. Despite their i doubt they can compete in the market with.
one of their goal is education, with windows people tend to learn only
how to use software. in linux however, you can learn so much more. RPi
set the precedence and their teaching material can be used across many
linux distro, witch useful for schools
one of the reason why windows wont work without and internet, is security.
without an up to date windows + antivirus, sharing files (it is bound to happen)
is a sure way for spreading digital viruses in a community. you just need 1 guys using an infected windows from outside the community
choosing linux eliminates that.
“The reason why most Windows OEMs don’t do this is” licensing issue not because people dont want bloatware. bloatware exist whether people want it or not. HP, acer, dell all have their own bloatware. to add more programs that aren’t thier own, require license agreement, which in turn add cost. it is also an antitrust issue, read MS antitrust lawsuit in us and eu. company are prevented by law to create a monopoly using their dominant place as a market leader….
No, using Linux doesn’t really eliminate issues with malware and infections… A Linux system, even if not infected, can still be a carrier of malware… For example! So you still have to be careful if you ever deal with a Windows PC and vice versa…
A Linux system is also not entirely immune to malware, you are just mainly safe from malware installing itself without any permission but most malware is in fact installed by tricking users and that’s something that can be done even on Linux and once the malware has permission then it’s free to do what it wants just as much as on a Windows system…
Linux is also not immune to hacking, you’re just far more likely to be hacked if running a Linux server for a major company than a personal user that hackers don’t care about…
While you’re also wrong on most bloatware… Since most OEMs get paid to add bloatware and that ends up lowering costs for end users! It’s just a pain to remove the bloatware afterward…
It’s a lot like advertisement, they pay to get more exposure and to help sell their products… End users thus pay less for certain products, they just have to deal with ads, bloatware, etc.
The license agreements for bloatware are mainly to prevent competitors from also pushing their bloatware or service… Like Mozilla makes money off who the default search engine provider for Firefox is and in turn that provider also makes money from heavier use of their service… They just can’t change the default choice until the deal is expired and they negotiate a new deal…
Even MS provides a discount deal to OEMs if they make Bing the default search engine as another example… End users can still change it but since most don’t this usually provides the paying party a opportunity to increase exposure and make more money…
Like you can get a cheaper version of the Amazon Kindle e-Reader if you get the version that supports ads… The same is true with PC’s and most bloatware!
Along with most trial ware, etc…
And companies adding their own bloatware isn’t limited to Windows… Most major companies making Android devices also do it and if it really added costs then we would see higher prices there as well but they don’t… People just either like those changes or hate them… but the point in most cases is to try to make the product appeal more or leverage their market to the advantage of the company…
While some things that are called bloatware are just Windows legacy support that helps them run on more hardware and support more peripherals than most other OS options!
Anti-trust issues do effect some of this but in most cases they have little to do with it unless there’s actual abuse… but simply pushing an advantage is not enough in most cases but competition has to be actually prevented!
we r talking about using it offline here in a community that has little or no IT background , and IN THIS CASE, just carrying a malware wont alter user experience, and double clicking it wont run/install in unlike windows. you need to be in sudo, you need to mark it as executable before it can do any harm.
for windows click it and click ok to the UAC pop up. for the tech illiterate, this will cause their device to slow down and heat up. impacting their experience
hacking is an issue to company that dont practise good security, like using short password, restricting ip / no of attempt, etc… It exist in both Windows and Linux.
but unlike windows, linux has much less vulnerabilities.
also your view about hacking personal computer is wrong. Many hackers do care, it provides them with a miner, spambot, proxy, etc……….
In bloatware, i was pointing @disqus_bw0sWRMCHt:disqus his view about it are wrong. im sorry i wasnt clear about the cost as i didn’t specify the who the cost apply to. you r right OEM do get paid for third party bloatware, but it add cost of licensing to that third party and return of that investment is not guaranteed, so some 3rd party dont invest in bloatware. soo my bad.
secondly, i didnt say bloatware is limited to windows, i only specify that mark view are wrong regarding there is no aditional software in windows because consumer will complaint about it being a bloatware. i simply point out bloatware exist wheater consumer complain or not. then i went on to explain why some bloatware dont exist in windows, like, but not limited to, licensing and antitrust.
bloatware from the MS do not exist be cause of the possible antitrust litigation that comes with it, like IE in EU. (yes i view IE as bloatware). i also think that by providing a free*(limited licence) Office suite in Windows, can be used as antitrust litigation. so no free* MS product is bundled with windows now a days unlike my old fujitsu XP laptop that came with it. (i dont know the situation in other countries though)
i do apologize that i wasnt clear in the previous reply
You do have a point, but what I’m pointing out is that your point tends to be exaggerated…
Like exploits are possible on Linux, as they are on any system…
Like, last year a Linux Malware used a Shellshock Flaw to Infiltrate Web Servers, among many other examples I could point to that show sudo isn’t always needed…
The malware threat also gets exaggerated with Windows to make it sound like there’s no way you would ever have to worry with Linux… and you always have to worry with Windows…
But this ignore other factors like security is only one concern to the end user and the reasons why Windows tends to be more soft on security is because of things like keeping the OS as usable and friendly as possible to end users…
A truly secure OS would be one pretty much no one would want to use because it would be like a prison… You’d have to follow strict rules and protocols in everything you do!
While you do generally don’t have to worry with a desktop Linux distro, it’s not so much that Linux has less vulnerabilities than Windows as much as it is the balance of security defaults more to security for Linux rather than worrying about the lay person user who doesn’t want to be bothered with permissions, etc. and tricking the end user is something that can pretty much get past any default security…
MS actually tried to add better permissions security to Windows but it ended up one of the reasons why people hated Vista, as it was just too annoying and people ended up clicking okay without really reading the warning and that defeated the purpose of the security measure…
While Linux security isn’t always a default… Like both Android and iOS started out more vulnerable than WIndows when they first started… and Android does make use of the Linux Kernel…
Apple’s OSX didn’t have most of the default Unix type security until more than a couple years after its original release… So there were a lot more vulnerable when it was first released as well…
So, it’s not always safe to assume just because it’s either Unix or Linux based that it automatically has all the same security measures… a lot depends on how the OS is set up and not just what Kernel it’s using…
Repositories as well, most are pretty secure but there are one or two that aren’t and malware could be placed on them… While a good enough hacker could still replace a existing app with a malware version… alter the verification, etc. to make it look legit, etc.
Even with Apple’s closed ecosystem the NSA still managed to plant code that let them spy and it took over a year before the code was discovered… and effected both iOS and OSX…
Besides, it is possible to use Windows and never have to deal with Malware and it is possible to lock the system down to make it much more secure than default (just unlikely the OEM would do it unless they’re pushing security)… Or you could just run Windows under a VM type set up and just reboot the VM if you ever run into any malware to clear it right up…
It’s mainly a precaution to always run security apps with Windows but actual risks varies per user and how they use their system, browsing habits, etc…
While there are other trade offs to consider like you generally have more app choices with Windows… Especially, if you like to game…
Factors like Steam for Linux may eventually change this but for now that’s still a reason to run Windows…
Anyway, it’s not like Windows basic security is as bad as it used to be… Built in AV, Firewall, and the Modern/Metro/Universal apps have things like running sand boxed going for them… this will be expanded to include desktop apps in Windows 10… Lots more back up options built in, compressed WIM file installation option, etc…. Windows Store tries to be like a repository to help reduce the chances of malware infected apps, etc…BitLocker for encryption…
Among other improvements coming with Windows 10… So let’s not make it sound like people are still using something as insecure as XP on a new system…
And, if mostly offline… then there’s a lot less risk of getting Malware in the first place…
from a security stand point i still think linux more secure than windows, despite improvement made by windows, i dont believe im exagerating, like you said. it is all based on life experience dealing with support, i still regularly see a malware deguised as the user .doc file. so i dont think im exaggerating.
Risk of getting a malware in and offline can be surmise as such.
days since last update * No. PC offline * no.of people using data drive that is used on both offline and network PC * no of times file exchange between offline PC * security permission lvl (1 for any file that is marked executable by default or 0.01 for not executable by default) * no. of user that has elevated privilege
the higher the value = higher the risk of infections.
as a home user, default in windows is always elevated privilege and in windows all files can executable
soo, IN THE CASE AS I STATED IN MY FIRST REPLY, 1 guy using and infected MS pc plugs a usb, the guy use that usb in his offline pc in the community, he/she open the infected file and a pop up comes up he just click yes, he shares some file in said PC to other PC in the community and other people do the same stuff, thus spreading the virus.
AND LINUX ELIMINATES THAT. 1st to execute a program from a mounted usb, linux user first need to change the file permission to executable and then run. but by doing that a linux user therefore knows that it is a program, not some files. also Linux doesn’t need anti-virus, which is used to scan executable malware,
and that it self says alot of things. care to explain how this is exaggerating.
this is the 3rd time im repeating and you juz keep on writing other security issue and i do agree with some of your point (security defaults and practises, but not about vurnabilities) , but you are reading and responding to what isn’t there.
as for the future of WIN os security only time can tell, but as of right
now, based on darknet hackers, WIN 8.1 OS is still less secure than linux. Therefore it is wise to choose a linux decision for security reason today.
so if you ask me which os is MORE secure by design , linux is.
many of what you are writing doesnt even relate to the point that im making.
Get your data right buddy, google it or here the what i saw on the first page of the search
[url=https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Linuxvirus]linux Virus list[/url]
[url=https://www.howtogeek.com/135392/htg-explains-why-you-dont-need-an-antivirus-on-linux-and-when-you-do/]why-you-dont-need-an-antivirus-on-linux[/url]
Sorry but my data is correct, you simply don’t see the actual reports on when there have been actual threats and vulnerabilities revealed for Linux… Most companies don’t report the full details of attacks… and unless a lot of systems get compromised or a big company has something happen like lose customer data that hackers can use for identity theft, etc. then it usually doesn’t make more than a hard to find news note…
Regardless, the reality is no OS is completely secure and again, most malware doesn’t infect systems by using a vulnerability but rather tricking the user to infect their own system…
You’re own examples demonstrated such examples, where a user would click something and install it and only after installation would they come to realize they had installed malware… assuming it’s the type of malware that makes itself known as spyware, etc is usually harder to detect…
Really, a good portion of what is considered Windows vulnerabilities is actually users making themselves more vulnerable… Like always logging in as Administrator, which makes it much easier for malware to trick a user to give complete access to the system and that would be true for a Linux system as well…
Most conclusions that Linux doesn’t need additional protection are based on the usual low risk because most desktop Linux users aren’t targeted and assumptions combined with misleading logic… Like requiring permission to be given can help seriously reduce the chance of getting a virus but malware extends far beyond just viruses and there are many other ways to get malware into a system…
Linux distros also benefit from the fact there are so many distros and the user base is divided among all of them… So it’s harder to make a attack that will work on multiple different distros but if desktop Linux ever went mainstream for general consumers then it’s far more likely we’d see much fewer distros or at least one where most people would rally behind and that gives hackers a easier target… So not a strength that could always remain a strength…
However, not all Malware needs “root” access to a linux machine to spread itself.
For example, no special privileges are needed to send an email with an
attachment out, or download a file from the internet. Like I pointed out before, a Linux system can still be a carrier/spreader of malware…
As to
vulnerabilities, most malware is spread via social engineering, not
software vulnerabilities… After all, vulnerabilities can be patched but user error can always happen and human nature is far easier to consistently exploit… but even if vulnerabilities are patched right
away there are still the problem of users not installing security updates
in a timely manner… especially, if they assume they don’t have to worry about security!
There also have been vulnerabilities that haven’t been patched in years… While many vulnerabilities are simply unknown and it’s a race between those who patch the flaws and the hackers who find and exploit the flaws…
A 2012 report even indicated that Linux trailed Windows in patching zero day flaws… The average being more than two years to get a flaw patched for the Linux Kernel…
So there’s safe, as in living in a good neighborhood type safe and there’s dangerous, as in living in a bad neighborhood… But just because one may lock its front door more consistently doesn’t mean the threats can’t just find another way in through the multiple other ways into the house/system…
The main argument you can validly make is Windows is targeted far more often and thus there’s a higher risk… like living in a bad neighborhood…
But, also like living in a bad neighborhood… a user can just use common sense and be both a little paranoid and cautious to reduce the risks… Not logging on as the Administrator, not going to the more dangerous high risk sites, not reading email you don’t know the origin of, not calling attention to yourself, etc. are habits you should have with any system because even if you don’t need to worry about a particular type of malware, like viruses, there are plenty of other ways for the hackers to get to you and your data…
https://arstechnica.com/security/2013/05/critical-linux-vulnerability-imperils-users-even-after-silent-fix/
https://www.networkworld.com/article/2231668/opensource-subnet/linux-community-finally-fixes-6-year-old–critical-bug.html
https://www.techrepublic.com/blog/linux-and-open-source/linux-repository-hit-by-malware-attack/
https://arstechnica.com/security/2014/03/10000-linux-servers-hit-by-malware-serving-tsunami-of-spam-and-exploits/
https://www.networkworld.com/article/2858742/linux/a-brief-history-of-linux-malware.html
i have grown tired of this, as i says A u says B, i say this particular
offline situtaion, you recite online situation. we seems to the
communication somewhere along the line. so i repeat, in this case, in the hand of it illiterate in and offline community, linux is a better choice than windows security wise. i wont dwell further in to
this.
p.s some of your statement are wrong are wrong.
1. i know about all off those reports, especially the flawed 2012 zero day report, read further review of that article. and look for the statistical data as to why
Windows also has old vulnerabilities that hasn’t been patch in years.
3.
server (majority are linux, also im not talking about just web servers) is targeted all the time. window seems
targeted more often because there are more tools available that still
works, not because for the sole reason many people use it. (e.g flash player ist a dominant as it used to be, yet it is still attack often, it is because of its many vulnerabilities.)
4. depend on implementation, attck vector via social engineering , i.e tricking user play, a very small role in linux based system. many look for access either via code vulnerabilities, MITM attack, password cracking, weak security practises, etc………..
soo clarify for me, overall which you think is more secure of the 2, linux or windows? and please do eleborate why you think so?.
lastly you still haven’t explain how i am exaggerating.
Of course, Windows also has some old vulnerabilities… It just helps to have a company to fix the problems full time but if you want length of time I also gave a link that shows a vulnerability that took Linux over six years to patch…
Anyway, you forget my primary point isn’t to suggest Windows is better but that there’s no such thing as a completely secure OS and that they all have issues, whether you think one is more vulnerable than another isn’t so simple as just security but also why!?
Many of the reasons why for Windows also apply to others because many of the reasons why are the users themselves! This also is part of how you were exaggerating, btw!
Switching to another OS isn’t going to change those reasons and may even make some of them worse because you’d be giving them a mostly false sense of invulnerability… Which is exactly what most would think when you suggest they would only have to worry about security with Windows!
Things like not using a secure password (which you only mentioned as common sense well after I started this conversation but would really not occur to a lot of lay people), always using Admin log in (makes it a lot easier to accidentally give permissions to malware), clicking every malware bait link, etc.
Added security is only useful if the user actually takes advantage of it instead of continuing to do everything wrong to defeat the purpose of those security measures!
While being aware of vulnerabilities at least keeps people more on their proverbial toes and not be so reckless…
Really, if Linux Desktop wasn’t such a small market to target there would be a lot more examples of malware… The fact we see ever increasing levels of attack on the servers shows this to be true!
The same was once true of OSX too, attacks were pretty much unheard of until that finally changed and now they got a ever increasing number of malware… especially, for iOS… which is suppose to be pretty secure now but malware, ransom ware, etc still happen…
And you never really addressed my point on the fact a Linux system can still contain and pass on malware even if it doesn’t directly infect the system… You mainly just dismissed it but adds to the scenarios that people could think they have nothing to worry about but really do…
Security is really a relative thing, Linux security mainly makes it hard for most forms of viruses to spread… It, however, doesn’t make it impossible… Proof of concept viruses and worms have been demonstrated to work and whether we’re aware of them or not there are always vulnerabilities in every system…
It’s mainly hard to find one that applies to all of the different distros as they all differ but that imposes other problems as trade offs for security…
Speaking of which, you also didn’t address any of the trade offs… suggesting security as the only reason people should consider but all users do have other concerns… and security isn’t really a crippling concern for most Windows users, which is another exaggeration you suggested would be the case… It’s not like there are no security updates for Linux either, they happen all the time there as well and keeping up to date is just as important…
So Linux may be the right choice for some but not everyone… the same with Windows… they all have their flaws and strengths and the end user has to consider them all to decide which they should choose… or just alternate between them like some of us do as well…
Having a system come pre-configured with Windows doesn’t mean someone can’t just slap on a Linux distro to either dual boot or even run within Windows… It also usually means the system can be had for less as there are usually other factors that help lower pricing… Like, they will usually sell more units for Windows (bigger market) and that helps lower unit costs per system… Support costs would usually be less for the OEM as they can draw from industry wide support and share the customer support with MS… etc.
While, keep in mind they could have gone the other way like OLPC has with the Sugar OS… but an advantage of Windows in a growing market is you have easier access to surplus/old hardware that the other OS choices wouldn’t necessary support… Like, if they wanted to use a old printer, then Windows is far more likely to support it…
There are lots of options, thankfully… because no one solution would ever fit us all!
Define, customized? Because there are customization options for Metro UI… The options are limited but there’s a difference from can’t be customized from just being limited…
While most Linux software lacks documentation! Most developers don’t have time or resources to provide detailed documentation, many projects are done as hobbies and not professionally, and the books either cover only the basics or go too advance and skip over the day to day stuff…
Even in the IT market, where Linux is doing far better than on the consumer desktop and even has dominance in areas like servers, many IT have to make up their own documentation and especially as many companies use custom implementations and in-house software that don’t help anyone outside of the company…
Not that there’s no documentation, some are better than others, but to say everything is well document is misleading to say the least…
I otherwise agree on the hardware but some of the cheaper options do limit options, like not providing a option to use a internal HDD, among other limitations… So depends on what trade offs you’re willing to accept…