https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/04/mic ... ure-sphere
Microsoft Linux Distro
Microsoft Linux Distro
Yes, you read that right. The last thing in the world I ever expected is for Microsoft to create a Linux kernel and use it to run its products. But, sure as shootin' that is exactly what the boys in Redmond did. It's not going to be mobile or desktop oriented, however. The current release is primarily for Azure cloud computers. But still; Microsoft Linlux
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/04/mic ... ure-sphere
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2018/04/mic ... ure-sphere
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
They already use the Linux Kernel in a lot of things.
I guess they finally realized, if they want to make a truly SECURE device, it takes Linux to do so, hi hi.
Technically though, it looks like they are building their own miniaturized Azure OS which uses the Linux Kernel, but I wonder how bad they will butcher it up.
They took the XML format and butchered it up, then renamed their proprietary version DOCX.
How they get by with pulling those kinds of stunts is beyond me!
I guess they finally realized, if they want to make a truly SECURE device, it takes Linux to do so, hi hi.
Technically though, it looks like they are building their own miniaturized Azure OS which uses the Linux Kernel, but I wonder how bad they will butcher it up.
They took the XML format and butchered it up, then renamed their proprietary version DOCX.
How they get by with pulling those kinds of stunts is beyond me!
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
People pay big bucks to use their butchered up software ... that's how they get away with it. 
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
I ran the numbers once to see how much it would cost me to use Windows and programs similar to what I use almost every day.
The amount was a staggering $6,000.00 and even then I wouldn't have all the programs I use.
On another note. I did find a Windows Program that uses Bash Commands so I could add a feature to the frau's computer.
It's just a simple short line of code someone wrote for me.
I'm sure it could be done in whatever terminal language Windows uses, but I could find no one who could do it in Windows.
Although they do have an appointment calendar that can do half of what was needed, if you could get it to do it right.
Even then it took several steps to achieve what one step does in the Bash command.
The amount was a staggering $6,000.00 and even then I wouldn't have all the programs I use.
On another note. I did find a Windows Program that uses Bash Commands so I could add a feature to the frau's computer.
It's just a simple short line of code someone wrote for me.
I'm sure it could be done in whatever terminal language Windows uses, but I could find no one who could do it in Windows.
Although they do have an appointment calendar that can do half of what was needed, if you could get it to do it right.
Even then it took several steps to achieve what one step does in the Bash command.
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
When I worked for a living the company standardized on Microsoft products. We used the Outlook Mail/Calendar software extensively. It had some pretty nifty features. Thunderbird has similar features these days, but unless you are running Mozilla software on your machine, you can't share calendars or do group invites. It all goes back to standardization and what you prefer to use.
Linux is a love/hate relationship with its need to use a terminal and command line shell commands. It's not geared for the crowd that finds Microsoft easy to use, but, as you say, you can do more when you get down to basics. However, you must know more when you go down to that level.
Yes, fully developed and supported software is costly. That's why FOSS was invented. I am convinced you get what you pay for in spite of the predatory practices coming out of Redmond.
Linux is a love/hate relationship with its need to use a terminal and command line shell commands. It's not geared for the crowd that finds Microsoft easy to use, but, as you say, you can do more when you get down to basics. However, you must know more when you go down to that level.
Yes, fully developed and supported software is costly. That's why FOSS was invented. I am convinced you get what you pay for in spite of the predatory practices coming out of Redmond.
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
There is a GUI for almost every heavily used command line operation.
And some Distro's have GUIs for every operation a user would normally use.
I have a question about safety.
Have you ever heard of Let's Encrypt?
They are offering Free SSL Certification for your websites at
www.sslforfree.com
Is this legit or is it a way for hackers to get your keys?
And some Distro's have GUIs for every operation a user would normally use.
I have a question about safety.
Have you ever heard of Let's Encrypt?
They are offering Free SSL Certification for your websites at
www.sslforfree.com
Is this legit or is it a way for hackers to get your keys?
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
Being the skeptical old curmudgeon I am, I find it hard to believe anything on the Internet is free - thinking Facebook here. Then again, I can guarantee that there is no cost to any of our members to use THIS website. Plus, do you really want to trust your domain security to an ACME server? I know nothing about ACME, but the name sounds bogus as all hell.
Having said all the above, it is possible for private certificates to be compromised by parties you know little about. Then again, they may not be in business very long if their evil ways are discovered. So, I'd trust them about as far as I can throw a 5lb bag of sugar. After dealing with them a while, and/or researching the experiences of their clients, I might trust them a little more.
They seem to offer a service to generate private certificates via a browser extension. Your browser, of course, would have to be compatible with the API they are using. Technically that's the only possible glitch. However, I'd not trust any browser to store high security text for me. Unfortunately, it's the only way SSL For Free to reach the masses they want to serve. FTP or Telnet or even e-mail seems to be beyond the limits of their offering.
The hosting service for this website offers SSL. You may on occasion run into a notice suggesting the certificate cannot be authenticated and thus you are on your own if you proceed. That's nothing I'm doing. In fact I have been avoiding the SSL service from our hosts given that there are so few people coming here. However, if I do want to switch, they will do it for free or some minimal fee. I feel that I can trust my web hosts much more than my browser or somebody who wrote a cockamamie extension for it. You probably can get the same deal from your web host. Even if you have to pay, the peace of mind would be worth it. Then, I'm wondering why you want to encrypt your web site in the first place.
Having said all the above, it is possible for private certificates to be compromised by parties you know little about. Then again, they may not be in business very long if their evil ways are discovered. So, I'd trust them about as far as I can throw a 5lb bag of sugar. After dealing with them a while, and/or researching the experiences of their clients, I might trust them a little more.
They seem to offer a service to generate private certificates via a browser extension. Your browser, of course, would have to be compatible with the API they are using. Technically that's the only possible glitch. However, I'd not trust any browser to store high security text for me. Unfortunately, it's the only way SSL For Free to reach the masses they want to serve. FTP or Telnet or even e-mail seems to be beyond the limits of their offering.
The hosting service for this website offers SSL. You may on occasion run into a notice suggesting the certificate cannot be authenticated and thus you are on your own if you proceed. That's nothing I'm doing. In fact I have been avoiding the SSL service from our hosts given that there are so few people coming here. However, if I do want to switch, they will do it for free or some minimal fee. I feel that I can trust my web hosts much more than my browser or somebody who wrote a cockamamie extension for it. You probably can get the same deal from your web host. Even if you have to pay, the peace of mind would be worth it. Then, I'm wondering why you want to encrypt your web site in the first place.
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
The first time someone visits a website, they get a WARNING this site is NOT SECURE.
They you have to hunt around for a tiny little button that says proceed anyway.
I've had to do it for THIS website! It says up at the top NOT SECURE, which is no biggie to me.
But it has not recycled so I had to do it again, that I can remember.
Lately, I've noticed several websites I have to do this like every 90 days.
There is nothing on my website that requires it to be secure, it's all there for public viewing anyhow.
I'm not selling anything, nor keep a database, so it's not something I really need.
But then like I said, folks who do visit my website get that WARNING.
So I would say about 1/3 of my visitors no longer visit. Based on my counters that is.
New visitor count is down by 1/3. Revisits are down only about 5%.
My host 1&1 does provide https for a small additional price.
Oh, the free one only verifies the website itself, nothing else.
So yes, bogus websites can get the same certificate.
I did find out that you have to Renew the free one every 90 days, which would be an annoyance.
Or you can pay them to auto-renew. Which I think is either 10 bucks a year or 10 bucks each renewal.
They you have to hunt around for a tiny little button that says proceed anyway.
I've had to do it for THIS website! It says up at the top NOT SECURE, which is no biggie to me.
But it has not recycled so I had to do it again, that I can remember.
Lately, I've noticed several websites I have to do this like every 90 days.
There is nothing on my website that requires it to be secure, it's all there for public viewing anyhow.
I'm not selling anything, nor keep a database, so it's not something I really need.
But then like I said, folks who do visit my website get that WARNING.
So I would say about 1/3 of my visitors no longer visit. Based on my counters that is.
New visitor count is down by 1/3. Revisits are down only about 5%.
My host 1&1 does provide https for a small additional price.
Oh, the free one only verifies the website itself, nothing else.
So yes, bogus websites can get the same certificate.
I did find out that you have to Renew the free one every 90 days, which would be an annoyance.
Or you can pay them to auto-renew. Which I think is either 10 bucks a year or 10 bucks each renewal.
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
I get notifications from the hosts of this website just about every month. They change the certificates that often. If there were more than three of us using this place, I might be tempted to go SSL and see what it's all about. The only security issue is the password you use for login. If it is unique to THIS website, it's no biggie. The business of changing certificates more often has been encouraged by the numerous attacks on big data. Tech Ops are finally becoming more aware of simple flaws and taking steps to fix the obvious. The other side of the coin is the browser. Chrome is pretty good at checking sites, but not all browsers do that good of a job. Thus the number of warnings you get depends not only on the renewal schedule of the hosting but also on the capability of the browser you use. It's going to get worse in the future until they fix the Internet. The way the FCC is going these days, I don't see any chance of that happening soon.
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
I think the EU has made a major protection step in many areas, not just on-line.
I forget the four letter acronym they use, but it has a lot to do with privacy and stopping spam.
The biggest difference between what the EU is doing, and attempts made by the US is fairly simple.
The EU has active enforcement agencies that are doing their job.
The US, although they have some agencies, they don't actively enforce the law, and in many cases have created problems we never had before.
e-mail harvesting is one thing the EU is aggressively going after, both in the EU and in the US.
All those gimmicks of giving away something free to get someones e-mail address will probably disappear.
It's still OK to give something away for free, but to later use the e-mail obtained from such efforts will get you fined big time. The person who has that e-mail address must have given the sender permission via a form for them to send further e-mails to said person. Applies also to telephone numbers and unwanted telephone calls.
Sounds like a pain to deal with but I think it is a great improvement.
Our government on the other hand, helped the telemarketers instead of slowed them down, by starting what is called The Don't Call List.
This list is given away free to all telemarketers, or anyone who requests same!
Although a few US based telemarketers do follow the intent and check the list and not call those on the list.
Unfortunately, it is a small handful of telemarketers, and all the rest use the list as a source of Known Working Numbers.
Our government does not have the manpower or ambition to enforce the Don't Call List, and telemarketers know this.
We have millions of major laws, none of which the government enforces. The laws are on the books so the people themselves can enforce them, if they have the time and money to do so. Patent Law is one good example of this.
After paying ten to twenty grand each to obtain my patents, if soon found out they are totally worthless pieces of paper to me. Why? Because I don't have the 150 thousand dollars per infringer to attempt to stop them.
The law is actually on the side of the infringers!
How can that be? Simple! If you don't go after the small infringers because you would lose money, the big infringers see this, and the law protects them, because if they show you are not actively pursuing other infringers, you cannot single out a single one from the bunch simply because they have more money. Learned this the hard way too!
I forget the four letter acronym they use, but it has a lot to do with privacy and stopping spam.
The biggest difference between what the EU is doing, and attempts made by the US is fairly simple.
The EU has active enforcement agencies that are doing their job.
The US, although they have some agencies, they don't actively enforce the law, and in many cases have created problems we never had before.
e-mail harvesting is one thing the EU is aggressively going after, both in the EU and in the US.
All those gimmicks of giving away something free to get someones e-mail address will probably disappear.
It's still OK to give something away for free, but to later use the e-mail obtained from such efforts will get you fined big time. The person who has that e-mail address must have given the sender permission via a form for them to send further e-mails to said person. Applies also to telephone numbers and unwanted telephone calls.
Sounds like a pain to deal with but I think it is a great improvement.
Our government on the other hand, helped the telemarketers instead of slowed them down, by starting what is called The Don't Call List.
This list is given away free to all telemarketers, or anyone who requests same!
Although a few US based telemarketers do follow the intent and check the list and not call those on the list.
Unfortunately, it is a small handful of telemarketers, and all the rest use the list as a source of Known Working Numbers.
Our government does not have the manpower or ambition to enforce the Don't Call List, and telemarketers know this.
We have millions of major laws, none of which the government enforces. The laws are on the books so the people themselves can enforce them, if they have the time and money to do so. Patent Law is one good example of this.
After paying ten to twenty grand each to obtain my patents, if soon found out they are totally worthless pieces of paper to me. Why? Because I don't have the 150 thousand dollars per infringer to attempt to stop them.
The law is actually on the side of the infringers!
How can that be? Simple! If you don't go after the small infringers because you would lose money, the big infringers see this, and the law protects them, because if they show you are not actively pursuing other infringers, you cannot single out a single one from the bunch simply because they have more money. Learned this the hard way too!
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
<steps upon his soapbox> The United States of America was founded on the principles of democracy. It was a great idea back in the 18th century where people were more willing to work together to achieve common goals. It's still probably the best system of governance on the planet, albeit not perfect. The Industrial Revolution took hold big time in this country and economics became the driving force behind our system of governance. Free enterprise and capitalism proved that the accumulation of money was the equivalent of amassing power and influence. Corporations as well as individuals became economic giants in this environment. Unfortunately, the common people, you and I, didn't have the money or the power to be influential. Those who did took advantage of lobbies in Washington. The political lobby system is intended to be a mechanism wherein the common man has direct access to his representatives and a voice in what legislation needs to be enacted and enforced. Thus it's not hard to understand how capitalists became the people for whom the laws are made. These days the Mafioso, both foreign and domestic, are challenging the capitalists, leaving us commoners in the dust. We don't have a chance, or representation, which is why you see the unenforced useless laws you cited above. </steps off soapbox>
I'm not sure how any of this relates to Microsoft's Linux distro, other than the fact it's intended to maximize profits for it's own purposes. The fact is that whatever laws Microsoft needs to maximize those profits will be (bought) enacted. What are the odds it will benefit us, the consumer? There are no laws requiring companies to benefit their customers.
I'm not sure how any of this relates to Microsoft's Linux distro, other than the fact it's intended to maximize profits for it's own purposes. The fact is that whatever laws Microsoft needs to maximize those profits will be (bought) enacted. What are the odds it will benefit us, the consumer? There are no laws requiring companies to benefit their customers.
Re: Microsoft Linux Distro
I gotta agree with you across the board Yogi!
There are groups that do help the small guy, but only if they have a good reason to do so.
Usually they can get more money from donors or better publicity. Else they don't bother.
There are groups that do help the small guy, but only if they have a good reason to do so.
Usually they can get more money from donors or better publicity. Else they don't bother.