Get Ubuntu online or uninstall it

Thanks Leeky; That was as clear as mud. to someone like me:haha:

I guess clear as mud was kind of unfair.. I apologize for that.wasn't trying to be rude..Just funny.I try to inject a little bit of humor in a lot of my posts.Sometimes I succeed.Sometimes I don't.
Actually I did get the gist of what you were saying.I asked about the seperation of my hard disk ,between Windows and Ubuntu. you took the time and effort to explain in detail,examples of how harddisks can be configured.Some of the terms I didn't really understand. Or at least not fully. I doubt if I'm ever going to do anything except divide my harddisk between Windows and Ubuntu.Unless there's more to it than that.
Right now,I'm just making up my mind about removing Ubuntu from my computer. Or. getting one of the wireless cards you showed me. I'm leaning towards getting a card.
Maybe you could explain to me some of the reason that some install Ubuntu.Instead of just sticking with Windows. More secure? Less prone to viruses?.Faster? I tried to install it,mostly out of curiosity,and because my Nephew in law.Who seems to know about everything there is to know about computers.He worked at Hewlett Packard for years,and has been building his own computers for even longer. Really likes it.
As usual. Thanks CB.

Man. Leeky. You really take the time and effort to answer a persons questions. I,very much appreaciate that..
Heres how much I don't know. I thought you had a choice between Windows Mac and Linux. Linux being the least popular.
When I get the wireless card installed.I'll be asking you to help me with all of the partitions..Umbutu sound really good.Heck.After I use it awhile I might want to stop using windows altogether..

*]Linux does not suffer with virus* issues, spyware or malware, so in that respect is very secure.

Linux can be infected by virus', but AV protection will stop it, but I believe very few are recognised and in the wild.[/QUOTE]

These two statements seem to kind of cotradict each other.
What do you mean by recognised and in the wild?

Can you send e-mails between windows ,like gmail and yahoo e-mail, and Ubunto
Or should I be saying between Windows and Linux?
I have all my music on a flashdrive. Over 2000 songs.will I be able to upload them onto Ubuntu?
Thanks again for your efforts to help. I'm sure there are questions I forgot to ask

Oh. Here's one. Would the same anti viruses used to protect Windows,be used to protect Linux? CB

Right now for protection I have= Avast 5. Ccleaner. Malwarebytes. Superantispyware. Spywareblaster. Spybot S&D. Hijack This. Adblock Plus. and Wot.
Would BitDefender replace all of these? Or. Would I have to install other things to go with it?

Leeky; I'm also a member of WorldStart Message Boards. It's Forums just like this is You ought to check it out.They could use a guy like you. Again Thanks CB

A few days later Wed.29th.I ordered my wireless card. Should be here in about a week. Guess I wont have anymore questions for a while. But. I'm sure to have a lot.After I get the card CB

The average desktop user does not need an antivirus on a GNU/Linux system. In fact there is probably nothing much more pointless that you could install by any stretch of the imagination...

The simple answer is: No you don't need any equivalents of those programs. (Though you can still install adblock plus in firefox if you wish)

Ensure your system is kept up to date and you'll be fine. Choose a strong root password and never do anything silly like running a desktop environment, window manager or any other programs as root. The only programs you should need to run as root on a daily basis are package managers (apt, aptitude dpkg, etc).

Programs like ClamAV are simply not needed for the average desktop user. They are mainly for server usage, especially samba servers that host files used by windows clients.

If you're running behind a router, you'll be ok and won't need a firewall either.

On the offchance that one of these fabled Linux viruses did manage to infect your machine, there is not much it could do to the system unless you were to execute it as root.

The 'insanity' is in actually running a program to protect others that should make the effort to protect themselves. If users want to run Windows, that's their business. If I send them a file, it's actually their responsibility to scan it with their own AV program and ensure that it's malware free. It's not a GNU/Linux user's responsibility to run what can be potentially useless software on their OS, to safeguard irresponsible or ignorant Windows users.

There is nothing that runs by default on MS Windows that accommodates GNU/Linux or *BSD nix users - indeed Windows likes nothing better than to nuke bootloaders and does not recognise any nix file systems by design.

The next crucial point is, that there are few cases where a GNU/Linux user would be sending binaries (the main sources of embedded viruses) to a Windows user - due to binary incompatibility. Usually one would send colleagues/friends/family a link and have them download a program for their own specific architecture, rather than actually emailing it or burning it to disk and giving it to them.

Certain people in certain cases may need this - for example if you're a Linux user and you support family and friends that use Windows without an internet connection - downloading files for them on your machine, burning them to disk and installing them on the Windows machine(s). But such cases are going to be very rare (lets face it, the vast majority of non techy users buy computers to go on the net with anyway?) and would hardly apply in a general sense to all desktop users would it?

Networks with samba sharing, and especially mail servers, is another matter, but in the former case if those machines on the network are only sharing an internet connection (i.e. connected to the same router or switch) and not files (i.e. samba is not configured or running and no file sharing is occurring) there is no reason the GNU/Linux boxes would need to run an AV program to somehow protect the Windows boxes. Almost pointless for the desktop user.

That's a rather exaggerated way of looking at this. I can think of very few occasions where I as a Linux user would need to send a windows user a windows binary via email. Lets just suppose they did, then yes it's their responsibility to check it for malware. Even if I were to scan it with an up to date anti virus program on the windows user's behalf and if the windows user were to then scan it, neither of us could guarantee it would be malware free anyway.

This thread seems to be heading into corporate territory, which is a whole new ball game, where politics, accountability and blame shifting is a big part of why AV software is used. I don't think we need to get into that any further here as in this case we are discussing AV for the every day desktop user.

Regardless of this, if windows user Joe sends windows user John virus infested email, does he open the attachment and then rant at Joe for not scanning it? Of course not, it's his system, he can secure it and it's his decision which emails to open.

Sorry, but this is just nonsense. I invite you to try and spout this on any reputable GNU/Linux or BSD nix community forum and see what kind of reception you get. By your logic the rest of us have to suffer running AV bloatware on a bog standard desktop machine, because MS ships a crappy product and some users think it's other people's responsibility to manage their security / malware protection for them? Why do you think these Windows users have a plethora of AV and anti malware products available?

None of which is executable under GNU/Linux and which Windows users should have an antivirus program for.

I suppose the next thing you're going to come up with is that it's us 1 or 2% of Linux or BSD nix users that are responsible for propagating all these viruses to the poor windows users?

Linux or BSD based mail servers usually always run some kind of AV program to protect windows clients. samba servers, again, these benefit from server side AV protection but don't necessarily need it (client side AV should be just as effective and is still required anyway - needless duplication?), also benefit. A normal desktop user certainly does not need an AV program.

I'm sorry Leeky, you seem to be a decent and respected member here and personally I see you as a likeable character, but when you are posting something that is so fundamentally wrong, I cannot just shut up and agree with you.

Regards

C

You two would be in big trouble for Hijacking my Thread.Had this been the Worldstart PC asked and answered forum.So watch it! Just kidding. They think it's a big deal when a thread is taken over. Personally I don't mind.especially if it's debates like the one the two of you had. It gives me the opportunity to learn.'
Got A few Questions/comments on this.Plus I got my wireless card in my computer. Questions about that.
But I've got things to do first So I'll save it for my next post CB

I agree with you 100 %. But over at Worldstart they would see it differen't.

but thats not important. What is is ME and MY problems

I may decide to go without AV as Caravel suggests.Although,being a long time windows user, the thought of going without protection is kind of scary.
If I do decide to go with AV then I need you to answer my original question. Would Bit Defense replace All of the AVs I'm using now?

On to my wireless card. I got the EDIMAX (unless the E is a Sideways M) Wireless 802.11b/g Turbo Mode PCI adapter.Which is one of the two you showed me.I got it into my computer O.K. ( unless after reading this you tell me I didn't)
My problem is with the install DVD
I put it in got it going and pressed English.At first things were going great I was going along clicking enter whenever I was prompted.Until it came to where it said Select a network connection you wish to connect to.Then click next.
If the wireless connection you wish to connect to isn't listed click rescan to refresh the network list.
It only shows one choice.SSID Signal BSSID CH Encryption Authentication type. It doesn't work.(you can't click on it) You can't scan for other networks because the rescan button doesnt work Also the Next button doesn't work the only thing that does work is Exit.
I tried it with my stick plugged in so I was already connected to the internet,and with the stick disconnected,so I wasn't on the internet. Didn't work either way.
What do you think might be wrong Thanks CB

To be completely clear, there is no harm in you installing an AV program - my worry is in you believing that having an AV program is necessary on a GNU/Linux desktop. It simply is not. In a practical sense, there are no Linux viruses and windows viruses cannot harm a Linux system..

The other programs you use, such as the registry cleaners, anti spywares and other programs are not needed under Linux. I have already answered your question a few posts previously: You can install adblock in firefox, but you don't need any more protection than that.

I would advise that you plug in a wired connection to your router first and sort out your wireless issues later on. Models and brands are unimportant when considering a wireless NIC, it's the actual chipset that matters, i.e. broadcom, intel, ralink, etc. Buying a certain model of a brand on recommendation can be misleading as in some cases one model can have two or more different hardware revisions, which equates to different chipsets. You can usually find out the chipset by doing

Code:

lsusb

or

Code:

lspci

That's fine, but what seems to be the "right thing to do" to you, may be wrong, or even deeply offensive to some (really). Your argument seems to come from the perspective that we as Linux users need to accommodate MS. I'm sure you don't mean this, but that is how it will come across to many.

It may be hotly discussed on Windows forums or forums like techspot, but not on linux forums. It's probably one of the least discussed subjects.

I've been at the debian forums for four years and have never seen anyone recommending AV software to a desktop user.

I've also never seen AV software recommended to desktop users at other sites such as linuxquestions, debianhelp, fedora forums and others.

The only other place, besides this, I've seen AV software recommended is at the UF and this is worrying but hardly surprising. The only advice I can give you is to take what you read at the UF with a large pinch of salt. The UF is a place where myths, canonical corporate policies and other fallacy are propagated all too readily to suite a corporate marketing agenda. It was a great site back in 2006 when I joined, but had long since turned into totalitarian and oppressive place when I 'left'. BTW if you ever manage to tear yourself away from the 'buntu family, it will be nice to see you at the debian forums some time. You will learn more from using debian in 2 weeks than you would learn from using Ubuntu for 2 years. No exaggeration.

That's true in a sense, but you're assuming that everyone runs up to date hardware, which is a fallacy. You're also forgetting the cpu cycles that AV programs often use up due to active scanning. Yes you can turn off active scanning on most AV programs, but then what's the point? However big or small a program is, if you don't need to run it, why run it?

It will compromise performance if it's running as with any process, you can call this negligible but anyway - as above.

As I've said before, Windows users install their own AV programs. Running an AV program on your Linux box, for the offchance that you might inadvertently email someone over a virus is overkill. It's up to the individual user of course and I'm not suggesting for one minute you should not be running an AV, but it should never be touted on messageboards to new Linux users as the done thing, standard procedure or "sensible".

No intention to cause offence, but it's as outrageous as your proposal that every OS, windows or not, should run an AV program to protect windows and it's hapless users. That is outrageous.

In a commercial environment, with 100% windows servers and workstations AV both server and client side is essential - no doubt about it. A network admin that doesn't install a fully supported AV package won't be in his job for long.

Where the servers are Linux based, server side AV is still required for file sharing and the mail server(s). For those rare cases where every server and workstation is Linux based, yes this is the rare case where you argument does hold some validity, every server and workstation would still need AV, because clients could still be emailing files outside their organisation (emailing binaries happens much more often in a corporate setting).

For the home user that does not do any of this, nor who is liable for any damage caused, AV is generally not needed.

No problem.

Thanks for responding caravel; If you look back at my earlier posts you will see my problem with a wired connection.

I don't have a clue how to find out about the chip sets by doing the codes below.
But. The instructions say it's 64bit compatible,and supports Windows 7.So I would think it's the right one

Code:

lsusb

or

Code:

lspci

[/QUOTE]

Now I feel that I installed the card correctly ( it's not that complicated) and I'm guessing that the CD=ROM that came with it running as long as it did shows that it's installed correctly. But I'm far from being an expert.If the card wasn't seated in the slot properly would the CD-ROM even work at all? In other words. Do you think, maybe I need to take the tower apart again to check? I really don't want to. That's why I'm asking. To make sure I wouldn't just be wasting my time CB