O
OS Chooser
LINUX.
G
Guest
Sweet
G
Guest
That is the BEST way to loose everything
G
Guest
Spoken like a true uneducated windows user
spyware and viruses are the best way to loose everything
linux and apple users have no viruses and spyware educate
youre self please
S
Scostigan
The reason that there is no spyware is becuase no one
actually uses Linux. Also becuase there are not enough
morons out there using Linux. Once morons start using
Linux there will be viruses and spyware. So dont fool
yourself into thinking Linux is safer than Windows.
Actually if you dont know how to configure Linux it can
be left open for attack much easier than windows 2003
servers. Especially with Redhat autoconfig or some other
autoloader installing Linux for you.
Windows is catching up to Linux and when it does Linux is
going to have a **** of a time recovering.
actually uses Linux. Also becuase there are not enough
morons out there using Linux. Once morons start using
Linux there will be viruses and spyware. So dont fool
yourself into thinking Linux is safer than Windows.
Actually if you dont know how to configure Linux it can
be left open for attack much easier than windows 2003
servers. Especially with Redhat autoconfig or some other
autoloader installing Linux for you.
Windows is catching up to Linux and when it does Linux is
going to have a **** of a time recovering.
S
SteveC
Will never understand treating OS's as if it were a religion. Why
evangelize? If Linux works for you, fine. But why use Microsoft's forum to
attack it. Tacky and not worthy of a person with self respect.
evangelize? If Linux works for you, fine. But why use Microsoft's forum to
attack it. Tacky and not worthy of a person with self respect.
A
Andrew Foss
I must disagree. with both sides.
Autoconfiguration is better because the package maintainers
know which options are less secure and can configure it
safely. There are numerous tools that check code for
potential buffer overflows and unsafe practices. Eric S
Raymod said it best: With enough eyes, all bugs are
shallow. Second: Maintainers are encouraged to go back and
fix bugs simply because what they create "scratches their
own itch." What they make they have pressing need for.
Microsoft, while no doubt they use their own products,
don't fix bugs as often. Linux maintainers fix bugs and
holes as soon as possible, because, to a person, their bugs
and holes leave themselves open to attack just the same as
the little guy. the learning curve for configuration can be
a good thing: it encourages people to read the
documentation, ask for help, and "Do the Right Thing." Best
practices without a central authority. The fact that
there's more than one way to do something (IE: you can use
xwindows, xfree, or even no WM at all, firefox, mozilla,
netscape, or even lynx/links for no pictures, for web
browsing, different versions of kernel modules that might
or might not have a feature spyware has, even down to the
equivalent of a windows print spooler.) means diversity.
And we all learned about diversity and evolution.
Stagnation and lack of diversity encourages infections and
can end up killing the entire population of an organism
(Dutch elm disease is a good example. As is diseases
involving vinyards) Windows autoconfigures to a degree
also, so your arguement is somewhat disengenuous. Also, I
don't think IBM and Oracle would get behind Linux if it
wasn't a smart idea.
On the other hand, Linux can be a pain to configure
(network sharing, for example. my firewall would be Linux
but for the fact that I needed something "now" and you
can't get much more 'now' than installing windows, clicking
7 times, typing some data in and pressing OK.
If Linux did become the dominant OS, I agree that there
might be more discovered bugs, but most linux distributions
have the equivalent of windows update and some even have
the equivalent of auto-update.
Windows is great for users who just want something to check
E-mail and play games, Linux operates well as a server OS.
Nothing wong with that. At the risk of pissing off MSFT I'd
like to remind about the teething issues of transferring
Hotmail from *nix (*BSD) to windows.
Use whatever works, but in the realm of security and
usability for highly technical applications, I'd have to
lean towards Linux. Average linux users are more
knowledgable and can help you to do what you are trying to
do, and the software is generally more featureful without
being bloated (emacs aside). You can get ahold of the
maintainers of whatever isn't working and most can help you
with a patch or updated version nearly immediately.
Besides, How can Microsoft compete with something that'll
scale from a 386 with 4mb ram (most distros. For embedded
systems, even less) to your latest Pentium 4 3.2ghz with
over a gig of ram. (Trust me, I've transferred a HD with
linux on it to a box where the main drive got corrupted to
the point that most recovery tools gave up, completely
different processor and speed, recovered the data off of
the drive, and replaced it on a replacement drive exactly
as before, shut down, pulled my drive and restarted, and
the system booted as normal. The user was quite impressed.
I'd like to see XP/2k do that without complaining. The OS
on the disk thought: "Okay, let's see, what do we need to
load to operate, load this that and the other, okay, we're
good, let's show the login screen. good." it does this for
all systems and hardware. Like I said, use what works, but
I lean towards linux.
Autoconfiguration is better because the package maintainers
know which options are less secure and can configure it
safely. There are numerous tools that check code for
potential buffer overflows and unsafe practices. Eric S
Raymod said it best: With enough eyes, all bugs are
shallow. Second: Maintainers are encouraged to go back and
fix bugs simply because what they create "scratches their
own itch." What they make they have pressing need for.
Microsoft, while no doubt they use their own products,
don't fix bugs as often. Linux maintainers fix bugs and
holes as soon as possible, because, to a person, their bugs
and holes leave themselves open to attack just the same as
the little guy. the learning curve for configuration can be
a good thing: it encourages people to read the
documentation, ask for help, and "Do the Right Thing." Best
practices without a central authority. The fact that
there's more than one way to do something (IE: you can use
xwindows, xfree, or even no WM at all, firefox, mozilla,
netscape, or even lynx/links for no pictures, for web
browsing, different versions of kernel modules that might
or might not have a feature spyware has, even down to the
equivalent of a windows print spooler.) means diversity.
And we all learned about diversity and evolution.
Stagnation and lack of diversity encourages infections and
can end up killing the entire population of an organism
(Dutch elm disease is a good example. As is diseases
involving vinyards) Windows autoconfigures to a degree
also, so your arguement is somewhat disengenuous. Also, I
don't think IBM and Oracle would get behind Linux if it
wasn't a smart idea.
On the other hand, Linux can be a pain to configure
(network sharing, for example. my firewall would be Linux
but for the fact that I needed something "now" and you
can't get much more 'now' than installing windows, clicking
7 times, typing some data in and pressing OK.
If Linux did become the dominant OS, I agree that there
might be more discovered bugs, but most linux distributions
have the equivalent of windows update and some even have
the equivalent of auto-update.
Windows is great for users who just want something to check
E-mail and play games, Linux operates well as a server OS.
Nothing wong with that. At the risk of pissing off MSFT I'd
like to remind about the teething issues of transferring
Hotmail from *nix (*BSD) to windows.
Use whatever works, but in the realm of security and
usability for highly technical applications, I'd have to
lean towards Linux. Average linux users are more
knowledgable and can help you to do what you are trying to
do, and the software is generally more featureful without
being bloated (emacs aside). You can get ahold of the
maintainers of whatever isn't working and most can help you
with a patch or updated version nearly immediately.
Besides, How can Microsoft compete with something that'll
scale from a 386 with 4mb ram (most distros. For embedded
systems, even less) to your latest Pentium 4 3.2ghz with
over a gig of ram. (Trust me, I've transferred a HD with
linux on it to a box where the main drive got corrupted to
the point that most recovery tools gave up, completely
different processor and speed, recovered the data off of
the drive, and replaced it on a replacement drive exactly
as before, shut down, pulled my drive and restarted, and
the system booted as normal. The user was quite impressed.
I'd like to see XP/2k do that without complaining. The OS
on the disk thought: "Okay, let's see, what do we need to
load to operate, load this that and the other, okay, we're
good, let's show the login screen. good." it does this for
all systems and hardware. Like I said, use what works, but
I lean towards linux.
K
kg4wxw
i have come across this site because there is a buzz in a
few of the chat roomms i hang out in because some one has
thrown a fly in the ointment at the microsoft web site. Ill
first say I make my living with the help of the Windows OS
i am a little guy helping to fix pc's for sevral small
buisness in my local area. i am primarily a linux user but
i also have 1 windows box (dual boot). I have sold 5 of my
companies on linux, I set up about 10 work stations a
server and a firewall. Everything came up nicely and i got
my check and havent heard from them since except for the
ocational hardware death (theres no money in hardware).
there is no money in selling and maintaining linux pc's my
money comes from spyware infected and virus riddled pc's if
i relied on linux to bring food to my table i would starve.
So i would like to say thank you to microsoft and all the
"Morons" out there for choosing Microsoft XP. And keep the
software bugs comming and please dont fix the problems with
SP2 its making me to much money!
Ham radio All THe Way Baby!
Dave
kg4wxw
few of the chat roomms i hang out in because some one has
thrown a fly in the ointment at the microsoft web site. Ill
first say I make my living with the help of the Windows OS
i am a little guy helping to fix pc's for sevral small
buisness in my local area. i am primarily a linux user but
i also have 1 windows box (dual boot). I have sold 5 of my
companies on linux, I set up about 10 work stations a
server and a firewall. Everything came up nicely and i got
my check and havent heard from them since except for the
ocational hardware death (theres no money in hardware).
there is no money in selling and maintaining linux pc's my
money comes from spyware infected and virus riddled pc's if
i relied on linux to bring food to my table i would starve.
So i would like to say thank you to microsoft and all the
"Morons" out there for choosing Microsoft XP. And keep the
software bugs comming and please dont fix the problems with
SP2 its making me to much money!
Ham radio All THe Way Baby!
Dave
kg4wxw
G
Guest
????????????????????????????????????????????
Do you really think that anyone cares about your
elaborate drug induced coma fantasy into the inner
working, and thought processes and personalities,
including the intelligences of users, of both the
machines. GET A LIFE.
Do you really think that anyone cares about your
elaborate drug induced coma fantasy into the inner
working, and thought processes and personalities,
including the intelligences of users, of both the
machines. GET A LIFE.
P
Pat Cook
1. Clean up our language. 2. Who cares, use what you
want, and leave everyone else alone. 3. Everything is
vulnerable when people really want to hack into it, MS or
Linux. Both OS's have their strong selling points.
want, and leave everyone else alone. 3. Everything is
vulnerable when people really want to hack into it, MS or
Linux. Both OS's have their strong selling points.
E
Evert Tigchelaar jr
Most spyware are target to IE and windows, you get lesser
spyware on Linux becourse most desktops run windows.
This doesn't mean you can't get spyware on your Linix computer.
You can only tell if Linux is better protected against
spyware if there is more spyware for Linux.
You can degrees the number of spyware on your pc by not
clicking on everything you see.
spyware on Linux becourse most desktops run windows.
This doesn't mean you can't get spyware on your Linix computer.
You can only tell if Linux is better protected against
spyware if there is more spyware for Linux.
You can degrees the number of spyware on your pc by not
clicking on everything you see.