Slashdot Mirror
Linux the Tortoise to Microsoft's Hare?
LukePieStalker writes "TheStreet.com is running a story by Ronna Abramson that makes a case for Linux cutting into Microsoft's server business and forcing Redmond to trim margins. A particular vulnerability is seen in overseas markets, but the heat should be turned up everywhere once Unix replacements are pretty far along by then end of next year. A quote from one CTO: [Linux is] "going to force Microsoft to spend more time on security and stability, and less time on adding new features.""
2.4.0 was stable? 2.6.0 was stable?! WHAT?!
That won't happen until Mac OS is ported to other machines. Macs cost way too much and you have to buy one of their machines to run it. Do they even sell servors?
Ops, I shuld have usd the prevuwe but in.
This is largely because Linux administrators demand higher salaries than Windows admins, which is at least in part because Linux administrators usually have real experience actually adminstrating a system rather than simply having a certificate under their belt that one can get at any tech institute.
Feel free to mod me as -1 troll if you think the above is bullshit.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Yeah, and that happens much more often than it does with the Penguin.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Oh, you're referring to the article that basically excluded data that referred to Windows breaches?
Yeah--the one that excluded user-run executables, as it should have.
Or did you actually read the article instead of popping up with blind fanboyism about your favorite overpriced OS?
Witness the Slashbot--if I dare criticize Linux, I am somehow a Microsoft fanboy. This us-and-them mentality is keeping the community living in a juvenile mindset. I use whatever tool to get the job done, be it my Windows XP partition or my Gentoo Linux partition.
"Sufferin' succotash."
I think the peguin is gay. Who else would wear a tuxedo everyday? And just look at that boyish face. Forget the teletubbies, Tux is obviously designed to recruit geeks to become gay.
I'm afraid you're missing the point of the folks who are complaining that the study is biased.
No, I'm not. They are Slashdot fanboys who need Linux to be #1 so they can troll Microsoft IRC channels without shame.
On Windows, it is possible to write a user-run, user-mode executable that can function effectively as a rootkit; hide its own processes and files, open network connections to send itself to other targets, access your mail, address book and documents, and even run its own SMTP server.
Wow--that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the security of the OS. Users are the ones running that program. When the user initiates the breach, what can you do? Hold a gun to their heads?
On Linux, because of the large number of different kernel configurations and application distributions (distros) that people run, this kind of exploit must be tailored to each specific target.
Not at all. It's just that Linux is not as widely used as Windows, but given Windows' popularity, you don't think virus authors would be using tricks involving, oh, the new kernel vulnerability listed in my sig, for instance?
That is why excluding user-run executables biases the study in favor of Microsoft products. Because it excludes a whole class of non-tailored viruses and trojans where Linux systems have significantly less vulnerability than Windows systems.
But Windows doesn't have the vulnerability either. The user is running attachment. Repeat after me--that has nothing to do with the security of the operating system and everything to do with the dumbness of the user. Is Linux insecure because you can get root without password with a simple option passed to LILO on startup?
This is to all the other replies below me. Maybe...just MAYBE...Linux isn't the 100% perfect golden OS you're making it out to be? BSD users are laughing and laughing.
"Sufferin' succotash."