Computer question

rrlund

Well-known Member
So, an Acer Chromebook. The wife threw it away a few years ago because it died. Royse got it going and I've been using it since. It'll shut down now and then and when I get it up and running, a little box comes up saying something about one update remaining, then that version of Chrome won't be supported or something like that. The same box pops up when the battery is almost dead.

Yesterday morning, it worked first thing while I was eating breakfast. I listened to the radio on it, checked email, YT and the local newspaper, the usual things I do every morning. When I came back in from doing chores and opened it up to watch Ag Day while I worked out, it did that blue light on thing where I always have to shut it down and restart it. It came up, I put in my password and got a screen that said something like ''Chrome OS damaged or missing. Insert'' some stick. I shut it down and restarted it, it kept doing the same thing.

I guess I just wonder if it happened because of that little box that kept coming up saying it wouldn't be supported anymore of if there was some virus or what? Not that it matters squat anymore. I have no intention of fixing it. We needed a new coffee maker too, so the wife went and got one and got a new Chromebook too. As cheap as they are and as easy as it is to restore information to one, they're as throw away as a disposable razor. All I had to do with the new one was log in with my email address and password and everything in the old one popped up in the new one seamlessly. I just wondered what really happened to the old one.
 
Likely a virus. If warnings appear, just shut it off before selecting anything. 50% of the time that fixes it. jim
 
Chromebooks use a Linux / android type operating system. They arent susceptible to viruses like Windows computers are. They also will not run windows programs, and most viruses are written to work under windows. Apples / Macintosh enjoy a similar immunity to viruses. There are a few viruses written to try and affect these machines, but they are very rare, and the damage they can do is very limited.

However, if they do not update properly, or shutdown incorrectly while updating, they can be corrupted, and will need there operating system and software reinstalled. They are quite easy to use and are fairly user friendly to operate compared to most windows based computers.
 
Most likely it is exactly as it says. Memory does fail over time. If the wrong spot fails, where the operating system is stored, the whole thing is corrupted.

Sounds like an old old Chromebook.
 
I use a version of linux called Zorin OS. Free download, and eliminates 99% of the problems you have with Windows. As mentioned above, you cannot run Windows programs on it without skills.
 
Let me correct you on a point of information:

There is no such thing as ''virus immunity'' on ANY computer. Period.

What is PERCEIVED as virus immunity is just that your particular machine and OS combination has not yet been targeted. Those evil beings that write viruses are looking for the most ''bang for the buck'' and target the operating systems most commonly used. That just happens to be ''Wintel'' systems. Apple computers are a much smaller segment of the computer users with Linux (I think) coming in about third.

Also, bear in mind that Linux is an open source operating system, and as such is even more vulnerable to hacking and virus attack. To most hackers, it is such a small segment that it just isn't worth the effort to write a virus for it.

Hackers look for recognition, and they will play to the largest audience.
 
> What is PERCEIVED as virus immunity is just that your particular machine and OS combination has not yet been targeted. Those evil beings that write viruses are looking for the most ''bang for the buck'' and target the operating systems most commonly used. That just happens to be ''Wintel'' systems. Apple computers are a much smaller segment of the computer users with Linux (I think) coming in about third.

It is a fact that Linux and other UNIX-like operating systems are architecturally different from Windows and consequently more difficult to attack. To be fair, MS has made great improvements in its products' security over the past three decades, but Windows is still considered easier to attack than Linux. That said, Linux-BASED operating systems such as Chrome and Android have made various compromises that probably adversely affect their security. Still, Chrome has a pretty good reputation as a secure operating system.

> Also, bear in mind that Linux is an open source operating system, and as such is even more vulnerable to hacking and virus attack. To most hackers, it is such a small segment that it just isn't worth the effort to write a virus for it.

It is the general consensus that 'security through obscurity' (the Microsoft approach) is no security at all, because vulnerabilities often exist in proprietary software for years before they're noticed and corrected. On the other hand, open source software is reviewed by different many different developers (thousands of programmers, in the case of the Linux kernel), all looking for potential vulnerabilities. It is simply not true that closed-source software is necessarily more secure than open-source. Some closed source software is secure, some is not. Some open source software is secure, some is not. Linux, and the Linux kernel in particular is considered to be highly secure.

As for market share, it is true that Linux has a small yet significant share of desktops. But on servers, Linux is much more popular. NEARLY ALL web servers, for example, run Linux. It is hardly a 'small segment'.
 
(quoted from post at 05:17:28 01/25/23) > What is PERCEIVED as virus immunity is just that your particular machine and OS combination has not yet been targeted. Those evil beings that write viruses are looking for the most ''bang for the buck'' and target the operating systems most commonly used. That just happens to be ''Wintel'' systems. Apple computers are a much smaller segment of the computer users with Linux (I think) coming in about third.

It is a fact that Linux and other UNIX-like operating systems are architecturally different from Windows and consequently more difficult to attack. To be fair, MS has made great improvements in its products' security over the past three decades, but Windows is still considered easier to attack than Linux. That said, Linux-BASED operating systems such as Chrome and Android have made various compromises that probably adversely affect their security. Still, Chrome has a pretty good reputation as a secure operating system.

> Also, bear in mind that Linux is an open source operating system, and as such is even more vulnerable to hacking and virus attack. To most hackers, it is such a small segment that it just isn't worth the effort to write a virus for it.

It is the general consensus that 'security through obscurity' (the Microsoft approach) is no security at all, because vulnerabilities often exist in proprietary software for years before they're noticed and corrected. On the other hand, open source software is reviewed by different many different developers (thousands of programmers, in the case of the Linux kernel), all looking for potential vulnerabilities. It is simply not true that closed-source software is necessarily more secure than open-source. Some closed source software is secure, some is not. Some open source software is secure, some is not. Linux, and the Linux kernel in particular is considered to be highly secure.

As for market share, it is true that Linux has a small yet significant share of desktops. But on servers, Linux is much more popular. NEARLY ALL web servers, for example, run Linux. It is hardly a 'small segment'.


Mark, thanks for your informative and useful clarification.
 
OK, you apparently want to take apart my reasoning on security, but I still stand by my statement that there is no such thing as immunity to virus attack.

No significant piece of software is totally free of bugs or weaknesses. There is no debate on that issue. That includes Linux and Mac as well as any other offerings.

As a side note, regardless of what operating system or software is used on the majority of web servers, even the hackers and attackers depend on web servers to spread their evil. Even the most evil of them is not going to attack their means of spreading their evil.
 
> OK, you apparently want to take apart my reasoning on security, but I still stand by my statement that there is no such thing as immunity to virus attack.
> No significant piece of software is totally free of bugs or weaknesses. There is no debate on that issue. That includes Linux and Mac as well as any other offerings.

I never said otherwise.

> As a side note, regardless of what operating system or software is used on the majority of web servers, even the hackers and attackers depend on web servers to spread their evil. Even the most evil of them is not going to attack their means of spreading their evil.

Attackers will attack any machine they think is vulnerable and which might be a potential vector to their ultimate target. Your statement is a bit contradictory, since in order to use a server to attack other machines, it's first necessary to compromise that server. Hackers prefer to use compromised machines to do their dirty work in order to cover their tracks.
 
Except that there are no local files. (in my opinion a fault) and though pretty stable, not (as seen) perfect. Jim
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top