this post was submitted on 22 Mar 2024
628 points (95.9% liked)

linuxmemes

21281 readers
1392 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  • ย 

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
    628
    submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
     

    Though the Windows thing was really funny ๐Ÿ˜‚.

    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    Yeah, but get this! It's not enough to just envoke cmd in Windows with just Win+R (sorry, sorry... Super+R ๐Ÿ˜), even though you're invoking it from an admin account, no sir, it's still just a plain user as long as cmd is concerned ๐Ÿ˜‚.

    And this is what you get when you wanna do backwards compatibility all the way down to DOS ๐Ÿ˜‚.

    [โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    We have pretty good backwards compatibility too, to my knowledge it's actually better.

    [โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    My point was, MS has backwards compatibility all the way down to an OS that has no sense of users and permissions and that is why Windows, even nowadays, has these problems. If you get rid of the DOS legacy stuff, you can have decent user permission and security in place, but too much shit relies on legacy code, so they keep it.