31
Fast-Nop
231d

Story of a penguin fledgling, one of my end users whom I migrated from Win 7 to Linux Mint. She had been on Windows since Win 98 and still uses Windows at work.

Three months before. Me, Linux might not be as good, but Win 10 is even worse. User, mh.
Migration. User, looks different, but not bad.
One month later. User, it's nice, I like it.
Three months later. User, why does Windows reboot doing lengthy stuff?
Six months later. User, I hate Windows. Why is everyone using this crap?
One year later. Malware issues at work. User to IT staff, that wouldn't have happened with Linux. Me, that's the spirit!

Comments
  • 6
    And here I am, with constant windows updates to X that somehow the internet says windows forces upon the user yet not one of them enforced upon me.

    I don't get it. For additional info, I am a HEAVY Linux user, 3 of my machines at home use a Linux distro, 2 at work out of 3, yet not one of the issues with updates etc.

    I have no clue what people do with their respective operating systems really. But it ain't hard to keep them steady.
  • 10
    People keep claiming that Linux is virus proof/more secure than Windows.
    https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/...
    Truth is there just aren't as many threats and userbase has high proportion of IT professionals or IT proficient people, who are less likely to click random 'you won an iPhone' links.
  • 6
    @AleCx04 my windows, fresh install just the other day, it only has the ability to postpone updates up to 30 days and then it stops giving me the option to postpone...

    Is your windows different? Cause That's what I call enforced updates
  • 3
    @AleCx04 Also your Windows will first "install" the updates, but then need a reboot to actually take effect. That's the same for a Linux kernel update, but Linux actually just does reboot.

    Windows will reboot and then process all the updates again because NTFS means "NeanderTal File System".
  • 3
    @impune-pl No, it's not. First, Windows decides by file extension whether a file is executable, which means downloaded files are executable by default. Second, it hides these file extensions by default. Third, an exe can have any arbitrary icon compiled in, for example that of a PDF.

    That's a clusterfuck of bad decisions which make the "invoice.pdf.exe"-attack work.
  • 3
    Btw., also nice story from the same user.

    Me: did you install the browser update?

    User: uh, no, I'm using the browser and don't want to exit.

    Me: you don't need to exit the browser.

    User: what? I can install the update while the browser is running?!

    Me: of course. That's Linux, not Windows.

    User: awesome! :)
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop If Windows decides by file extension why are downloaded files always executables then? They're not.

    Accept that nothing is perfect but please don't just use such small things for complaining. You can easily change settings - especially if you're helping people with a new OS you can help them even more by just (de)activating these options.

    You may complain if it's impossible to fix or after fixing it. Don't complain and do nothing - that's worse :)

    There's enough to rethink decisions like buying any MS product but some default settings ain't that much.
  • 4
    @Psychosadistic Because downloaded files can have any file extension, and that is controlled by the other side. Which means that the other side gets to choose whether it's executable. In terms of security, this means executable by default.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop
    What are you talking about? xD
    If the file extensions are not visible there is still a file extension and it's only executable if it's an exe. Dafuq ...

    If you cannot see the extension this is a you-problem. (or whatever it's called)
  • 5
    @Psychosadistic I think I already mentioned the "invoice.pdf.exe" attack, no? That's why this stupid shit works under Windows, but not under Linux.

    And no, it isn't a user problem. It's a Windows problem. MS intended to let the user identify the file type (e.g. PDF) by the file icon. That's why they hid the extension. Only that an exe can have any icon compiled in.

    Also, going by file extension for executability is totally braindead. Plus that its not only exe, but also a ton of other extensions.
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop
    I understand the problem with that but you're arguing with such a small shitty detail ... there is even more and worse shit in Windows or MS products.

    Usually there is something called SmartScreen - if someone's trying to open a PDF it won't show that but with an exe ...

    JUST LET WINDOWS SHOW YOU THE EXTENSIONS.

    Again a reason for just reading and never writing or arguing in such communities. People won't learn.
  • 1
    @Psychosadistic Sure, it's only one example, but the popular "invoice.pdf.exe" attack has been around for ages, and you'd think that MS would have done something about that. But no, they even chose and kept the defaults so that this attack is even easier.

    Most users keep the defaults because they are not IT experts and hence have to trust that the people who built the system know it best. Which is misplaced trust with the clowns at MS, of course.

    That's an aspect of a work-share society, and also devs are in the same situation of being clueless users in just about all domains of life other than IT.

    Btw., you seem to confuse "learning" with "accepting misguided and stupid crap".
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop

    I'm done. I know what you're talking about but maybe you have to live just some more years or have different experiences. Idk.

    Learning - yes. How to accept, live, do things and so on. I wasn't talking about the little option you have for the extensions.
    Btw I'm on your side with MS is shit (in any and every way).

    Complaining won't change a thing and that's the problem. So you could learn even more about the shittiest products and their behaviour but who really wants that.
    Because of my job I sometimes have to dig deeper and it's only getting creepier. But I am at least able to help others more.

    We have to accept the current state while it's not changeable and live with it. And this doesn't mean you ain't allowed to complain or be frustrated - it's just a way of thinking, living, ... where you save energy ;)
  • 1
    @Psychosadistic As you can see from the start posting of this rant, I don't just complain. Instead of wasting time with troubleshooting Windows problems, I rather migrate people to Linux. That is, if their specific use case allows that.

    The discussion about invoice.pdf.exe started when one other the commenters claimed that Windows has more malware issues just because it's more widespread and hence a more attractive target, to which I pointed out an example of a very basic attack vector that Windows still allows and Linux never has.
  • 1
    I hate that file extensions are hidden by default, that's one of the first things I change on a new windows machine.

    However one of the few things I actually like about windows is that exe files are executable without having to chmod them. Being executable is a fundamental concept in computing and shouldn't require a user to do anything other than tell the file to execute.
  • 1
    @AleCx04 Are you running Pro? It seems like there is less bullshit in Pro. I have 2 windows home computers at home. They have yet to receive update for 11. So hopefully they won't do the same shit they did with 10.
  • 1
    @Demolishun you bring a very valid point sir. I am indeed running pro on the windows machines that I have.
  • 1
    @NotJeckel That's only because of another Windows problem: that you download exe files from all over the internet instead of going via your distro's package manager. Under Linux, you don't do that in the first place.

    @Demolishun That changes with Win 11 where also the "Pro" requires ever more BS to get around an MS account - which in turn is just MS spying more on you.
  • 3
    @Fast-Nop They f-ed up Windows 10 too. Latest update I cannot create other users on same computer without ms account. At least I saw this on home. I may switch that computer to linux anyway. Just tired of the bullcrap.
  • 1
    @Demolishun Over the years, I've learnt one thing about such products. There is a difference between my wish to customise a product, and me undoing ever more crap that the manufacturer put in deliberately.

    In the latter case, I'd end up fighting the manufacturer, and that's the point to take a step back and think whether the manufacturer's goals are still aligned with mine. Most likely not.

    Jumping ship does cause work, but so does staying aboard.
  • 1
    @Demolishun Specifically for the account thing, it's not an oversight that MS leaves convoluted ways to get around this. There are three reasons.

    First, they catch most end users who are not even aware. Second, they leave room for people who do care to rationalise how it's not too bad. Third, resetting such stuff (and also other privacy options) at every update is meant to slowly grind away the patience of the second group so that they give in and join the first one.

    It's a completely dark pattern and absolutely user hostile. I don't trust a manufacturer who resorts to such means.
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop I even see Linux distros starting to push for forced updates. I don't like this trend no matter who does this shit.
  • 1
    @Demolishun There was some controversy in Mint, but the way they did that was good IMO. They only show nag screens if you havn't updated in a really long time.

    If that's not because you forgot to update, but because you don't want to, then there's no point in using the Update Manager at all, and you can disable it in Preferences -> Startup Applications.

    With some of "my" users, I found that they just didn't notice the red "updates available" icon in the tray, that's why they didn't install updates.

    So the new way is a compromise of not forcing anyone, but also addressing user oversight as root cause for systems running without security updates.

    As for said users, I configured their Update Manager to fully automatic update mode. That's not the default, but a choice, and one that they want. User quote: "Can't Linux just take care of itself?"

    That is of course to be paired with Timeshift system snapshots in case anything should go wrong.
  • 3
    @Demolishun if you ask me, it all went downhill after XP. Man I really liked windows XP
  • 0
    @Fast-Nop That I can download software from wherever I want to isn't a problem.

    I know package managers are all the rage, and I love them for software development, but I'm a grown up and am fully capable of finding, downloading, and using software without being handheld by some package manager.

    Give me a git repo or product website with a simple download link any day over some fancy package manager or app store. Downloading and installing user facing software just isn't that complicated that it needs automation, in my opinion.
  • 3
    @AleCx04 It did go downhills with Vista, but rebounded with Win 7 (aka Vista 2.0) which was a lot better and more stable than XP IMO. I regard Win 7 as the best Windows ever, and it was the last Windows where MS tried to make it good.

    After that, it was Win 8: a desperate try to gain relevance in the smartphone market by using the only trick MS knows, abusing their desktop monopoly. Didn't work, just ruined Nokia.

    Then Win 10: axing QA, cutting cost, de-prioritising Windows. Nothing wrong with that from a shareholder perspective whose interests Nadella is supposed to implement, but it did leave a lousy Windows.

    Win 11: like Win 10, but also headed for generating tons of e-waste by excluding perfectly good PCs. Both because MS is unable to test Windows, and they earn from new PCs with Windows being sold. Win 11 is not only user hostile, but also environmentally harmful.
  • 0
    @NotJeckel It also leads to DLL hell and system bloat, plus the shitty user experience that every fucking application you open nags you with an update screen.

    But yeah, if you say it's not a problem because you're an expert, the reverse conclusion is that non-IT end users shouldn't be using Windows. Totally agree with that.
  • 1
    @Fast-Nop It is hard to accept that Windows 10 was one of the "better" versions. Since it was shit compared to Windows 7.
  • 3
    @Fast-Nop 100% I should have included that I did like Windows 7 as well.

    I am trying to hold on to windows 10 for as long as I can, much like I did with the other ones that I enjoyed.
  • 3
    @AleCx04 Don't worry, Windows 13 will fix everything...
  • 2
    @AleCx04 For me, already Win 10 was so unacceptable that I pulled the plug on Windows altogether.

    Interestingly, some of "my" users already had concerns with Windows' privacy issues. That's because they grew up in communism, and that teaches you a lesson on surveillance and why to mistrust it.
Add Comment