Mac os x vs linux security




'+relatedpoststitle+'

Which is the most secured operating system? What ever might be the operating system you are using, you need to be aware of the methods to counter malware and viruses. Malware is actually programmed to take advantage of particular exploit in a particular operating system. Malware coded for one operating system won't affect the other. By this, we can say that the security of the computer depends on the operating system your are using on it. Everyone would like to have a secured operating system on the board but prefers what they know about well. Exploring Security Vulnerabilities in Windows Windows, after 95, 98 and editions of operating systems, truly tasted success with Windows XP only.

The simple user interface and capability of running on older systems made XP a lovable operating system for users. Windows XP was not only the most lovable operating system but also a secured one. Security loop holes in previous versions are closed and enhanced the ability of handling certificate errors. The introduction of the Windows security center in XP service pack 2 made it easier to keep track of defensing status of the computer against malware and viruses. Windows XP has got older now. The ten year old operating system has been hacked relentlessly over the years.

The popularity of the operating system has become a choice for hacking as it was used by most of the computer users.. Thus, the most lovable operating system has become a vulnerability for itself. The security holes found in XP were declared non-patchable by Microsoft experts. Meanwhile, Windows vista, which made its debut in while XP was still ruling the world, also received bad feedbacks as it was not compatible with the older systems like XP.

The users of XP had found it difficult using vista with whole new interface and revamped operations. Adding to that, the graphical interface started to expose annoying bugs while using. The drastic failure of vista had inspired Microsoft to develop Windows 7 eliminating the bugs in it and providing a moderate support for older systems.

But Windows 7 offered wealthy new features, including features related to security. When the UAC was first introduced, it was mocked in the media - Apple even made an advertisement about it. It protects your PC by ensuring that programs cannot gain elevated access privilege to your system without permission. Prior to UAC, malware could easily do this without the user ever knowing the wiser. Microsoft had made improvements to it and made windows notify every important security information to the user. The security center is revamped as Windows Action Center now.

A windows user would notice it in the system tray with a flag icon showing the security updates and information from time to time. Later, Microsoft introduced Windows 8 with whole new design again. This operating system was made more secure, closing the loop holes in Windows 7 and with revamped metro interface.

This operating system is compatible with both the touch and non-touch screen devices making it a all-in-one operating system. Windows Defender in Windows 8 is made a powerful security tool than in Windows 7. It protects the Windows 8 computer like anything. Verifiable Certificates. Lifetime Access. Learn More. Your email address will not be published. Forgot Password? Python Certification Course. Java Course. Selenium Training Certification. Become an IoT Developer. You could deploy websites to remote server without having to care about Windows vs Linux filesystem differences.

The only real problem which you missed is the hardware. Hardware support on Linux wasn't really good these days. I had to buy a new printer and scanner and setting the CRT monitor to work at acceptable framerate took a lot of fiddling with Xorg config. You could drag and drop within a Xaw application, but not from a Xaw application to a Qt application. A lot of distros routinely shipped with like 5 windows managers, besides KDE and Gnome. There was a very brief period, between cca. Then everyone started having delusions of grandeur again, in an earlys-Unix manner, and things have been pretty much degrading ever since.

A development that's largely unsurprising between KDE's architecture astronautics and Gnome's see no feedback, speak no feedback, hear no feedback attitude that GTK, sadly, adopted for a pretty long time. The unpleasant consequence is, of course, the "app problem" you speak of. Two major rewrites later, they haven't re-accumulated this wealth of applications and some of the ones that they do ship or advertise today are practically abandoned or remnants from the KDE 3 days.

Some of the developments have been outright catastrophic, like KMail, which was turned from a very useful mail client to something that borks in a gazillion unpredictable ways as soon as you try to configure more than one account. Similar things are happening in Gnome land, where they've chased feature-parity with Gnome 2 for years as they've been scrambling to fix everything that wasn't wrong with it and the horde of bugs that ensued from these fixes. Which, in fact, is why they have three forks in the first place. Nowadays we have people trying to keep a KDE branch that hasn't been developed in almost ten years alive, and actively using it TDE.

That's because, for all its flashiness, Apple and design fetishism, the super-disruptive community of desktop developers has failed to develop anything that's convincingly better than what was available ten years ago. The Linux desktop today is far less fragmented, but that's because a most of the people who could fragment it by developing fragmenting applications have long given up and use Macs and b a lot of the traditional functions of a computer's desktop and applications have been eaten up by the web.

There's little fragmentation to have when virtually all you use now is a web browser, the terminal and maybe a mail client. Sadly, it never gathered much attention outside the former NeXTStep users crowd, save for a small resurgence of interest back OS X adoption soared and a lot of people began to actually like Cocoa.

Which is quite a shame. Seems Darling is still being developed as we "speak". The Github repo is showing commits as recently as 2 days ago. And it builds on Gnustep in an attempt at supporting OSX software running on top of Linux from what i can tell.

GNUStep is still being developed, much to my amazement, but somewhat slowly. Back in , it was actually in use for some commercial development, too, so it's not like it's a long-abandoned turd. But the development rate is fairly slow and many applications that use it haven't been updated in a while. I expect it will be all but dead in the years it will take the lovely members of the Linux Foundation to push Wayland everywhere. The biggest hurdles to GNUstep's adoption were a its lack of documentation you were generally expected to use the NeXTStep documentation, although some functions were not implemented at all and others were slightly buggy and b the fact that Gorm and ProjectManager were really buggy for a really long time.

Auzy on Jan 12, Actually, back in early days, Linux was probably worse than Windows A few things changed the landscape. Steam also made a huge difference. I think Linux will be the better option after: But there are still a few rough edges. PulseAudio took a while to be good. I recall removing it in every distro for years and using ALSA instead.

click here

Is Mac OS X Truly More Secure than Windows?

Perhaps I didn't play sound very often in multiple apps at the same time who can listen to two sounds at once? Never mind that Alsa offered dmix even back then, but you had to know to enable it yourself. Frankly the major reason for PA to exist at all is to handle transitory audio devices. I think Poettering started working on it because he bought himself a pair of USB headphones basically a USB soundcard with some headphones hardwired to the analog pins.

Dmix could just as well have been extended to do audio routing. Or just ram sound down all channels unless the user decides to mute some of them. I heard this stuff " It especially pisses me off that so much of it is PR -- which I appreciate, but which I think has little place in the world of free software, at least the way I see it. For all of you poor onlookers who have no idea why people don't like PulseAudio, sit down and let grumpy ol' notalaser tell you the story of how PulseAudio gets all this hate -- much of which is, in fact, entirely undeserved today.

Back in or so, things were really bad when it came to audio on Linux. The biggest problem most users faced right after being able to finally make something come out of their speakers was mixing audio streams from more than one source. This was especially relevant because, at the time, audio effects were really in vogue on the desktop. The problem was that OSS was flaky and had basically no support for software mixing -- which meant that, save for the few sound cards that supported this feature in hardware, you couldn't play more than one stream at once.

ALSA, on the other hand, was in a very early state, had all sorts of trouble, not too many drivers and updates were going slow considering that this was back when virtually everyone installed Linux from CDs and the biggest hurdle to a rolling release model was dial-up. The way most desktops solved this problem was with a sound server yep, basically PulseAudio. The bad news? They were really slow, high-latency and I mean high latency, sometimes I'd get the sound alert a dialog about ten seconds after closing the dialog and were a little funky.

If aRts' queue stalled, for instance, the effect was a little comic -- after unstalling it would end up playing all the sounds that had accumulated in the queue. It was very comic. By or so, however, the whole concept ended up being mostly irrelevant, as ALSA began to really support hardware and software mixing. Gnome eventually dropped ESD altogether. Those of us using something else finally rejoiced and never ran a sound server again.

By the time it got included by default in Fedora, in , playing multiple streams using nothing but ALSA was very much a solved problem. I think it was so solved that it worked on Gentoo out of the box, without having to configure anything, on the more common sound card models. Not that Linux sound was perfect -- drivers were still flaky-ish sometimes, but obviously that was not something that a sound server, be it PA or something else, could solve.

So fast forward to , when PulseAudio is actually unleashed upon the computers of everyone else except Lennart and his friends as it's adopted and enabled by default in Fedora 8. To put it mildly, nothing worked anymore. Very literally -- when we installed it at the crufty place where I held a part-time job there, it broke sound on every single one of the different configurations we had, from laptops to desktops.

On really old desktops, the breakage was subtle high latency, occasional crashes. On newer laptops it was entirely terrible, they wouldn't even hiss. PA had no useful documentation, basically no means to do any useful debugging, and its upstream team quickly made a lot of friends due to its leaders' difficult if superficially gentle personality.

This was extremely unfortunate because alsa -- while not sucking as much as Pulse's PR machine claimed -- was still pretty bad, and many of its design decisions were firmly rooted in the landscape of the late s Linux. Linux' sound system needed the improvements that PulseAudio brought; unfortunately, PulseAudio was both very slow in delivering them in a manner that would not crash once a day, that is and very eager in being adopted, which resulted in it being widely deployed while it was pretty much in early beta.

This is how everyone came to hate PulseAudio and Lennart Poettering. It created quite a rift in the community, too, one that went on to be made even deeper. It also hurt PA's development pace in the long run. This complete with a "you are holding it wrong" like statement from Poettering as new servings of bile rolled in Yeah, that was even terrible-er.

Fedora mostly fixed things by release 11 or so not that this wasn't still about, what, 1. I don't think being able to play multiple sounds simultanously from the desktop in the Win9x era was that common anyway although some sound cards probably supported it. I do find it useful for playing my own music while playing a game or watching some talk-only video and so on. Maybe that's referring to ESD. I tried Linux back in the Win 98 days. I don't remember which distro.

I went back to Windows because the X server crashed at least once a day. Windows was much more stable for me. I don't really care about apple's influence or ragging on the new mac book pro. But I will say that linux has come miles and miles. My transition from Windows to full time linux by way of Ubuntu was incredibly seamless.

The only thing I really miss is Excel. Sadly Excel for Mac is the main thing keeping me from switching to Linux. Have you tried the google docs sheet? A lot of Excel lovers seem to like it. Google Sheets straight up fails if you try to upload files in that format. No preview available and no option to work around. So I would have to open the file in Excel anyway. Relatively new versions of LibreOffice are capable of opening simple files, but once you get into features like named ranges LO fails. So even if the UI is acceptable, failures on data import force me to keep a copy of Excel around.

Keep a VM with Excel for Windows around just in case files don't work in Excel for Mac, but I've used it maybe once in the last 6 months. It's almost there. Used to use excel a lot earlier on Windows in data science job. Now have excel on Mac, but google spreadsheets mostly gets the job done on most occasions.

Sharing some stuff with third parties who exclusively use Windows and just want an excel. Speed of working with all the keyboard shortcuts still seems better in desktop excel as compared to google spreadsheet but I am happy with the progress of how many of those same shortcuts now work on google spreadsheets. Can you give some examples?

Or even better, some example files to test. Some people that use Office really push it hard, they've got macros, indexes, all sorts of junk that's edge-case. The converters do not always pick up on this stuff, or if they do they subtly mangle the formatting enough it's all wrong. For example, if you have an index then a tiny kerning shift can bump an item to a new page and screw up your numbering. It really depends on the types of documents you're dealing with. Some are hell, others are a no-brainer.

We would love to have your bug reports: ColanR on Jan 12, I remember working in an office environment with some very large powerpoint files slides with large images , and the rule of thumb was that 'openoffice is free, but MS can handle the big stuff'. Don't know if that's still true, haven't tried OO in a while. OpenOffice is basically dead in terms of development nowadays. If you're looking for a desktop office suite on Linux, LibreOffice a fork of OpenOffice is still actively maintained.

I tried Libreoffice writer briefly recently. I imported some large pictures onto a single page and it became unusably slow. It seemed to be redoing an expensive computation likely the pictures with every character I typed. So yes, clearly not as optimised as Word. I had to reluctantly ask to borrow my wife's computer with MS Office for this particular task. Do you have a guide? I dont want to be snarky but its literally just using a gui wrapper for WINE called "Play on Linux", google it and just click through a bunch of dialogues its very very easy and stable!

I heard that their Office compatibility is better than LibreOffice. I find gnumeric to be superior to excel for my workflow: You could try office's web app thing if you are mostly a read only excel user. AndrewUnmuted on Jan 12, Surely, you could run it with Wine? You could try SoftMaker Office. Both the old. This guarantees trouble-free data exchange with Excel users. I haven't felt restricted by linux in a very long time, and I've been using it for over a decade. Out of curiosity what do you or anyone else who wants to chime in use for filling PDF forms?

Adobe is about the only reason I still dual boot Windows alongside Linux: Evince, Okular, and so on. And don't forget PDF. The still-common advice to install Adobe Acrobat Reader is outdated! And it has been outdated for years. In fact, some time ago the FSFE started a still successful campaign to convince public entities to no longer tell people to download Acrobat whenever they offer a PDF file. With public entities you can argue that they advertise Adobe without getting paid for that, that they ignore the fact that PDF is an Open Standard, and that they put the plethora of good PDF readers into disadvantage.

Instead, most of these public entities now point to a community-driven overview of Free Software PDF readers: As a Linux you don't need to worry about that, you almost certainly have already installed a good, free PDF viewer in the default installation. Google Chrome added that feature at some point recently. You can fill in forms you open through it.

Linux vs Mac: 7 Reasons Why Linux is a Better Choice than Mac

And it's a very good experience. Chromium possibly does it do, have not tested tho. Insanity on Jan 12, I can confirm that it works on Chromium with this test file: You can install adobe reader on Linux. On Ubuntu it's acroread from package adobereader-enu. Although sometimes you can use Chrome or evince, or okular , occasionally Adobe Reader is the only one that can fill forms properly.

But Adobe does not officially support Linux any more so you won't get updates. I've had some success with running current Adobe Reader in wine but trying to print makes the program crash, so there you have it. Every form I've had to work with in the last 5 years was either fully online docusign or required me to print it out and sign it. Atril works well. Atril is what Evince used to be before it regressed in usability. Basically atril is evince minus the Gnomish UI, which a lot of people hate. XorNot on Jan 12, Linux actually has a whole ton of pdf manipulators which I find a lot easier to use for most common tasks then Adobe or which actually do things you can't do with reader.

I always liked Okular, but it seems external PDF readers are less and less necessary for simple work. I honestly can't remember the last time I have had to do that. One idea would be to try installing Adobe via wine if you can't find a native program. LarryMade2 on Jan 12, I fill in tax forms with adobe 9, if no that I think the new acrobat compatibles for Linux are getting better at forms now. Last time i did that about 6 years ago i opened it with gimp and drew over it. Okular is by far the best PDF app on any platform. It supports annotations, margin trimming, overriding colors and other accessibility options.

NuDinNou on Jan 12, It is the default PDF viewer in gnome, I think. I have been using Linux for a long time, and it seems like every time I try to watch a DVD, it's a fresh round of hacking for 30 minutes before I can get it to work. After seeing the recent announcement here about Handbrake, I grabbed the closest DVD, fired up VLC, watched the first few minutes of it, and shortly afterwards I had ripped and encoded one of the episodes to a file I can watch on my Roku.

The only hacking I did was to install libdvd-pkg or something like that. Last time I checked, some early blueray DVDs will work on Linux but newer ones will brick your blueray reader. The AACS key file is updated every now and then. I get it from here: Hydraulix on Jan 12, I don't even see how this could be possible. Say hello to DRM. Best i recall they introduced a updated DRM system for BR some years after launch, and to play those discs one need to either firmware update or replace the player.

Never mind that the BR spec has all kinds of weirdness, including things like bundled Java applets?! All in all, its problems like these that keeps us torrenting. Wow, that's crazy. I haven't really used the drive other than what I mentioned. I was planning on doing the same to most of our "media collection" so I'm hoping it continues to go well. Thanks for the heads up. I'll be looking more into this. You just need to install one package at the most for dvd decryption, or use VLC And that's for Ubuntu CaptSpify on Jan 12, I use linux as well, but wifi drivers are always an issue, as well as sound.

Sure, things are much better, but I think most criticisms of linux not being "out of the box" ready are valid. Not as a comparison to apple. You want osx you buy the hardware they specify. Buy a laptop known to work out of the box with linux and it works out of the box with linux. Try it on any random laptop, ymmv. Not many of them work as badly as non-apple blessed machines with osx.

It's pretty rare I can't get something useful out of any old laptop with a linux install. Is hackintosh still even a thing? NegativeLatency on Jan 12, I have a hackintosh as my main computer. It works ok. Hackintosh is still very much a thing. I had a great I recently tried to get Yosemite or something working with a Core-i5 Sandy Bridge PC and it did not go well due to graphics drivers. OJFord on Jan 12, Meanwhile, other devices are fine doing the opposite. It definitely does not work out of the box. You have to get and compile some driver from GitHub using dkms. After some stable Ubuntu updates Wifi just stopped working.

Never had a problem with macOS Wifi since You need to check the chipset before you buy. Intel and Atheros have a good reputation for Linux support. Broadcom does not. I heard broadcom is leaving the wifi market soon. If so, this should get better in short order. The thesis was that Wifi is simply not a problem anymore on Linux, which is false. Wifi is not a problem if you pick the right chipset.

However, this has always been true. But it's currently not the case that you can take an arbitrary Windows or Apple machine, install Linux and have a working Wifi. It's very much hit and miss. AstralStorm on Jan 12, The remaining holdout with problems is Broadcom. All other chips Realtek, Ralink, Atheros, Intel to name a few of the more popular generally work. The only trouble you may get is with cutting edge hardware because manufacturers are slow. It does not work out of the box. Breaks with stable Ubuntu updates.

Why Linux is better than Windows or macOS for security | Computerworld

The driver also seems to be quite flakey, regularly losing connection to the AP. How do you expect a normal user to this? I really don't understand why there isn't a niche company that does nothing but make high quality peripherals that work in Linux. Intel chipsets are OEM only. Cards are readily available on Amazon, but are all gray-market apparently. The engineering effort is as low as it gets for hardware manufacturing. There are problem devices out there, but more and more they're the exception, rather than the rule. Which macOS version is that?

I stay up to date, it's Its not true these days anyway as you can just use the windows drivers if everything else fails. Which works perfectly except the initial 10 minute setup. Is ndiswrapper still being developed? I am pretty sure i got a win7 driver working without any further issues.

I could be wrong tho. Just set up linux on a machine recently with an Intel network chipset. Mint had no driver that supported it so I ended up having to build from source. I can't imagine trying to understand that process if one is not a developer. This is What Intel chipset was it that didn't have a driver built into the kernel? That's usually your safest bet. I think the issue was that I was installing from a Mint 17 bootable USB but I needed the driver to be able to upgrade to The ethernet controller is an Intel ILM rev The driver source that worked was https: What I had hoped would happen during install was that the kernel would fall back to some simple driver, kinda like the simple VGA drivers, and then find the correct driver and install that.

Sadly there's no basic compatibility layer for NICs, except in so far as many small manufacturers emulate some specific well known NIC. Intel doesn't really do that, though. But they do tend to update the drivers in linux pretty quickly themselves, which is what makes them attractive for linux use. FYI mint sucks with these things. Their driver support seems more random than anything.

That said i am pretty sure i remember some kind of bloat kernel in their repos which ships with all the relevant stuff. Kliment on Jan 12, There's an official ubuntu mate flavor now which is everything I enjoyed about mint with none of the things I disliked about it, so I'd recommend trying that. Installed Ubuntu This should be the ideal environment for working with Android I've literally never had a sound card that didn't work on Linux since alsa stabilized in the 2.

WiFi drivers are much less likely to work out-of-the-box; usually you need a firmware file which may require futzing with the windows driver installation package. Another feature I'm yet to have any confidence in is that I can just close a Linux laptop, and have it do a pretty much perfect suspend that will come back to life in seconds even if it's been closed for days. As a counter example, I've yet had this to be a problem on any laptop I've owned.

I had issues with OS X sometimes that I put the MacBook into a bag and it would get hotter and hotter because it didn't sleep and the air couldn't move, untill it panicked and shut itself down to not start burning. I started owning laptops in I have no complaints about suspend itself, but I do find lidswitch detection to be faintly unreliable on various laptops.

I often find my laptop fully powered up and hot in my backpack. I suspect poor debounce. I cannot remember having any trouble playing DVDs on a Linux based system within the last decade.

Wrapping Up

Through this time, I've used: If your distro doesn't come with DVD playing capabilities out of the box, there are plenty of instructions regarding this on the the web. I have a hard time seeing how you could possibly be being honest about this. Isn't distributing libdvdcss illegal in the US and therefore most distributions don't include it? So, most distributions don't come with full DVD playing capabilities out of the box. This is the reason for parent's complaint - it's legal, not technical.

I have exactly the same experience of "30 mins hacking to make a new system play DVDs" - sure, it's a single package install usually, but which package? Does the package include the library, or does it contain a script that downloads the library because of the legal issue? I know the answers to these questions on Debian because I use it so much and it has a well updated wiki , but plonk me in front of a distro I've not used before, or with poor documentation for their particular idiosyncratic way of end-running the law, and suddenly it's a minefield.

I should have been clearer, I guess. Yes, there's some legal issue but - a google search is not illegal. That's the dishonesty I'm talking about.

Getting dvd playback working in a distro is a do it once and forget about it until EOL type thing. NoGravitas on Jan 12, True for Fedora, probably Debian, probably not Ubuntu. For Fedora, it's a matter of adding the RPMFusion-nonfree repository, and installing a couple of packages. Mikeb85 on Jan 12, What distro are you on?

As I recall, installing libdvdcss, libdvdnav, libdvdread from the official repos solved that problem and allowed me to painlessly watch dvd's through players like VLC and MPlayer. I usually use VLC without a problem.

mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security
mac os x vs linux security Mac os x vs linux security

Related mac os x vs linux security



Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved