Slashdot Mirror
Windows vs. Linux Security, Once More
TAGmclaren writes "The Register is running a very interesting article about Microsoft and Linux security. From the article: 'until now there has been no systematic and detailed effort to address Microsoft's major security bullet points in report form. In a new analysis published here, however, Nicholas Petreley sets out to correct this deficit, considering the claims one at a time in detail, and providing assessments backed by hard data. Petreley concludes that Microsoft's efforts to dispel Linux "myths" are based largely on faulty reasoning and overly narrow statistical analysis.' The full report is available here in HTML form, and here in PDF. Although the article does make mention of OS X, it would have been nice if the 'other' OS had been included in the detailed analysis for comparison."
What, no macro virus-infected Word file?
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
You misspelled "The caress of another man".
Amazing that it took a report to tell us what we already know
We already knew this. This report is for them.
Free XBox, PS2
And besides, last night while I was watching $stupid_cable_news_show I saw an ad for Microsoft. It said they were secure. Then I saw that same ad in $idiot_management_magazine. They can't advertise it if it's not true, so we should go with Windows Server 2003 for our new application.
And, besides, I just got Microsoft to sell Windows Server 2003 for $50 per copy by saying we'd switch to Linux. Here's the box, now go install it.
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
Petreley concludes that Microsoft's efforts to dispel Linux "myths" are based largely on faulty reasoning and overly narrow statistical analysis.
Microsoft, official platform of the 2004 presidential campaign.
... turning to the 3-D map, we see an unmistakable con
They funded this too. But this time they forgot to check the "Study in favor of Windows" checkbox.
*evil grin*
Free XBox, PS2
Tut, tut, Mr. Mytzlplk: /.land, it is bad form to accept the null hypothesis that moderators have RTFA, and clue #1 about irony.
In
but what if you had a nickel taken away for everytime the conclusion was wrong?
I don't know what this guy is talking about. Windows uses spheres for permisions to run stuff. On the inside, you have all Microsoft Programs and on the outside you have all Non-Microsoft programs. See? They use spheres just like Linux.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Really? I can go through my log files and find automated probes from LOTS of peole who were "brave" enough to put a Windows server DIRECTLY on the Internet.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Did you have a point?
Mars Aspects
Mars is reddish
Mars is smallish
Mars may or may not have had water on it
Earth Aspects
Earth is blue-greenish
Earth is Earth-sized
Earth has lots of water
BIAS! What the fuck, dude?
I Bill Gates can prove that Windows is more secure than Linux. Watch as I write it down on this piece of paper. SEE? See what it says? It says 'Windows is more safe'. Don't believe me? Watch me pay someone else to say it. Believe it yet? Well how about if I buy an expensive report and tell them to say Windows is safer. Now do you believe it? NO!!
Damn, who do I have to buy off to make you people believe that Windows is safer?
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Check back here for the answer at 3am...
Slashdot doesn't serve XHTML.
Technically, Slashdot doesn't serve HTML, either. Slashdot serves some markup language that is sufficiently similar to HTML that most browsers can find a reasonable way to render it if they squint at it hard enough.
Of course, the same is true of 99% of the web. Still, you'd think this bastion of geekdom would dare to be different.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Hi, d_jedi!
... yep, you don't have to back that up either. (By the way, I think you're full of incomplete nonsense.)
Thanks a pantload for your point-by-point. What I've learned is that
1) If anyone disagrees with you, it's because they don't know anything about OS design and you don't have to give any info about that because, I don't know, I guess you're too important.
2) If anyone disagrees with you, it's complete nonsense and
3) Okay, you've got me there. You're not really being bombastic on this one. But points 1, 2, 4, and your coda kind of make up for it.
4) Speaking of point 4, how about if I just quote you and say you make no sense whatsoever? Is that persuasive?
Your coda (That is a complete load of bull $hit) is best of all, because it can easily be read as summarizing your post!