Linux At School

[WMD]

What make me laugh is at work we have a few Linux/Unix machines and we're not allowed to connect them to the network for security reasons.

Yes.  Corporate networks must be kept at a certain level of insecurity, else the boss gets pissy.

[Refalm]

What make me laugh is at work we have a few Linux/Unix machines and we're not allowed to connect them to the network for security reasons. This is because the network was security approved by an external body and they didn't include Linux in their approval which is very silly.

Being a company that works on MOD contracts we should be running Linux/UNIX on all our machines. I suspect the reason we're not is because Linux won't run all the software we use and the retards in the IT department are mostly Microsofties.

Gotta love that bureaucracy

[PacKiN 1i1 SoMeThiN 4 BG]

I have experimented a little bit with SlackLive!:tux: If you want me to find a link just send me a pm.  If I can't find a link then I can transfer it to you somehow I have it on a cd(probably ftp)!  Don't know if that is what you are looking for or not.  I also found a pretty cool little tool where you can mod your own XP live its pretty neat! :thumbup:

[Aloone_Jonez]

Yes.  Corporate networks must be kept at a certain level of insecurity, else the boss gets pissy.

true.
We can access the Internet at work via our network but the fire wall is so secure we can't sites we need for our work! Even some PDF files are blocked! Our IT admins say "We can't be sure what's sort of information PDFs contain" But since when has anyone found porn in PDF format?

The most retarded thing is we have plenty of stand-alone Internet machines all running Windows, all with admin rights and a very poor firewall and anti-virus, not surprisingly they're all infected. I've had to upgrade the one in our office to Mozilla Firefox but it still gets infected, it's really stupid we already run Linux on some machines so why we can't run it on the Internet machines is beyond me.

[Stryker]

true.
We can access the Internet at work via our network but the fire wall is so secure we can't sites we need for our work! Even some PDF files are blocked! Our IT admins say "We can't be sure what's sort of information PDFs contain" But since when has anyone found porn in PDF format?

The most retarded thing is we have plenty of stand-alone Internet machines all running Windows, all with admin rights and a very poor firewall and anti-virus, not surprisingly they're all infected. I've had to upgrade the one in our office to Mozilla Firefox but it still gets infected, it's really stupid we already run Linux on some machines so why we can't run it on the Internet machines is beyond me.

 wait, you can download an exe but not a pdf?

[Aloone_Jonez]

wait, you can download an exe but not a pdf?

No it won't allow exes, but ActiveX controls load ok.

Some PDFs load ok and some are blocked by the fire wall. The IT department say the PDF with embedded jpeg/gif images are disallowed.

[PacKiN 1i1 SoMeThiN 4 BG]

Knoppix kicks butt too!  :tux:

[pulsechild]

I keep hearing that IBM (because they took the side of Red Hat in the RH Vs. SCO battle) is going to move away from Win and use Linux. If that is true, don't you think Linux would slowly show up in schools anyways considering, atleast from where I live, all school computer are IBMs? I'm in high school and I'd think colleges would use IBMs too. I mean, switching to Linux would be an awesome idea. More security, less costs, less problems, more built for networking, less hardware requirments, and a lot of the software they'd have to buy for Windows (like MS Office) is FREE with Linux.

I mean, for all we are allowed to do with the computers anyways, you wouldn't need to know ANYTHING about Linux. Opening programs and files and whatnot is virtually the same on linux as it is in Windows.

Besides, our schools use Novell, so why not use SuSE and everyone will realize why Novell makes shitty software for Windows  :rolleyes:

[Calum]

linux users always make this mistake of believing IBM's hype, just because you see IBM staff interviewed in linux magazines means nothing.

their linux stuff is probably simply supposed to replace AIX, with no intention of changing the users of windows over to linux. IBM even use windows machines (on IBM hardware though) as standard for their employees (i know this having worked last year onsite at the IBM office here).

IBM has its own view of the world, and they won't be jumping on any linux bandwagon any time soon. same with Sun Microsystems, you can't expect a corporation which, let's face it, got where they are today by being self serving, to continue to scratch the back of Linux forever.

[Orethrius]

their linux stuff is probably simply supposed to replace AIX, with no intention of changing the users of windows over to linux. IBM even use windows machines (on IBM hardware though) as standard for their employees (i know this having worked last year onsite at the IBM office here).

IBM has its own view of the world, and they won't be jumping on any linux bandwagon any time soon. same with Sun Microsystems, you can't expect a corporation which, let's face it, got where they are today by being self serving, to continue to scratch the back of Linux forever.

Calum, I don't normally do this, but you've left quite a few logical fallacies intact in your counterpoint.  First, you're confusing middle management with company-wide decisions.  IBM is expanding their Linux userbase, mostly because of wider-spread demand for support by their products.  That doesn't mean that individual jobsite managers (for example, at the office where you worked) are unable to decide for themselves whether to use Windows or Linux.  Most are going to gravitate towards Windows, however, because of established precedent, not because of a company-wide decision.  

Bear in mind that IBM was a  huge purchaser of UNIX in its prime, and even came up with their own OS (Warp) to compete with it - ultimately being double-crossed by Microsoft in the development process.  That being said, I wholly expect that if IBM sees a strong competitor to Windows they'll jump on it at the first opportunity (don't forget the whole SCO debacle - they were involved there, if only on the investment side).  Also, don't badmouth Sun until they've proven their greed.  They've done more for the FOSS community than most other companies of comparable size, and were quite possibly the first to adopt Linux on any kind of wide-scale deployment basis.  Just because they want clients, that doesn't make them inherently evil.  If that were true, then I would need to report back to His Dark Majesty as soon as I finish posting here.  As would most of the rest of us.

[MrX]

ah- Dr Rex Morgan-
you have the solution for my daily blues [is that how homer said it?]

Mr X

[Calum]

Calum, I don't normally do this,

do what? let's find out:

but you've left quite a few logical fallacies intact in your counterpoint.  First, you're confusing middle management with company-wide decisions.

ok, this is interesting, i suspect you have misunderstood something i said, but i am willing to take responsibility for my part in that, do go on.  

IBM is expanding their Linux userbase, mostly because of wider-spread demand for support by their products.

ok, i haven't done any market research but this doesn't surprise me, in fact it's kind of what i was saying, a company will not just go "oh linux is great, we'll push it to everyone immediately", a company like IBM responds to user demand. It's quite easy to believe there's a certain increase in user demand for linux systems, but i find the gung ho attitude of many longtime users that IBM is linux's knight in shining armour far too optimistic

 That doesn't mean that individual jobsite managers (for example, at the office where you worked) are unable to decide for themselves whether to use Windows or Linux.  Most are going to gravitate towards Windows, however, because of established precedent, not because of a company-wide decision.  

if you say so, i still think the proof is in the pudding. At a Sun microsystems site last year i saw all the employees using solaris, and all their applications were java based. nice. the site provided support for linux systems and solaris systems, fine, except one of the employees told me that they don't actually support any linux machines in real life, they just say that they can, basically they only deploy solaris systems but they could theoretically support an existing linux site if they wanted to. Also it was quite obvious that the java based apps were not popular amongst the users either. they were generally regarded as being slow and clunky. My point is this, that regardless of who or what within a company decides to settle on a particular standard, you can't force somebody (customers, users, managers, CEO, whoever) to "like" and "want" something. some linux users may want IBM to be the linux cavalry, but it's not realistic in my opinion, that's all, same with Sun. Perhaps they will behave like the linux cavalry in some circumstances, but all i was trying to say was that linux longtimers seem sometimes to have this expectation that that's going to happen all the time. it won't. as you say, companies are motivated by their market.

Bear in mind that IBM was a  huge purchaser of UNIX in its prime, and even came up with their own OS (Warp) to compete with it - ultimately being double-crossed by Microsoft in the development process.

actually warp (known simply as OS/2 until 1994) was originally developed to compete with windows. When IBM realised microsoft were screwing them over by developing ms windows on their own and not cutting IBM in (like they did with DOS) IBM decided to attempt to kill microsoft off by cutting them out of the development loop of OS/2 and making OS/2 "better" than windows. It probably was (although from user comments you wouldn't think so, not having tried OS/2 myself, i wouldn't know), but windows was cheaper and hit the market faster. Unix does not feature in this story.

That being said, I wholly expect that if IBM sees a strong competitor to Windows they'll jump on it at the first opportunity (don't forget the whole SCO debacle - they were involved there, if only on the investment side).  Also, don't badmouth Sun until they've proven their greed.  They've done more for the FOSS community than most other companies of comparable size, and were quite possibly the first to adopt Linux on any kind of wide-scale deployment basis.  Just because they want clients, that doesn't make them inherently evil.

once again, you are putting words into my mouth, companies are not inherently evil but (and this is what some people do not seem to quite get) they are not *inherently good* either. it's not "microsoft == evil; sun == good", companies are motivated by what they believe is their market. for microsoft, it's their huge pool of cultivated morons that they have been nursing since 1975, for sun it's site managers with a network to run and services to keep running 24/7. we all know that after 2 generations, morons want windows, but network administrators do not necessarily want linux, and if they are pliable regarding which system they want, i suspect sun would rather push solaris.  

If that were true, then I would need to report back to His Dark Majesty as soon as I finish posting here.  As would most of the rest of us.

what? oh yes, we're still on the evil thing. well, when it comes to that linux is evil too, you know, see: http://www.undeadlinux.org/index.php?category=2

but then i never said being evil was wrong, now...

[Orethrius]

Intelligent and courteous reply, not to mention prompt, as per usual.  Really, I don't think anyone could've replied to that better if they tried.  You raise valid points, and I'm not even going to bother to counter because - let's face it - you're right, here.

Good show, Mister Carlyle.  :cool: