Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft & Linux Should Co-Exist In China

Posted by Zonk on from the get-along-or-i'm-turning-this-country-around dept.

alabamarasta writes "In a recent report from China titled "Embattled Linux fights back", it appears that Microsoft is just as embattled." From the article: "Citing an executive at Microsoft headquarters, Lu said Linux and Windows should co-exist. Microsoft in recent years has been struggling with an increasing number of security flaws on its Windows platforms while Linux is generally regarded as more secure. 'For users, openness increases the trustworthiness,' said Lu."

3 of 162 comments (clear)

  1. What's so different here? by totallygeek · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hell, most of the networks I encounter have Linux and Windows co-existing. Sometimes even interoperating!

    --
    Click here or here.
  2. Article summary by pjrc · · Score: 3, Informative
    For anyone who didn't bother to read the Embattled Linux Fights Back article, here's roughly what you missed:

    Lu Shouqun, leader of a Linux advocacy group believes the Chineese govt should make more use of Linux and open source.

    The CSIA (an industry group, likely funded in part by Microsoft) claims (in a "report") the govt preference for open source is harming the software business.

    Lu says open source is high quality, low cost, and can coexist with Microsoft, openness is good. Lu cites (but no actual citation info is given, no link, no name, no exact quote, no date, nothing) that someone at Microsoft said Linux and Windows should co-exist.

    CSIA says GPL destroys profitability. Lu says they misunderstand the GPL, admits China linux businesses are unprofitable, and claims that community and international collaboration is needed.

    CSIA spews FUD... patents might destroy linux. Lu replies that proprietary software faces more patent risks.

    Lu says community in China is needed.

    .

    The other article is pretty much the same thing rehashed and edited down a little.

    Pretty much more of the same. Linux/open source/free software advocates say one thing, Microsoft shills say the opposite.

    --
    PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
  3. Re:Lack of Intellectual Honesty. by arevos · · Score: 3, Informative
    Ya, just like Firefox is more secure then IE.

    As of writing, Internet Explorer 6 has 20 unpatched vulnerabilies, one or more of which are marked as highly critical. Firefox has 3 vulnerabilities, with one or more marked as less critical. So yes, Firefox is more secure than IE.

    The Linux market is so incredibly tiny that no hacker looking to make money takes the time to hack Linux.

    I would not rate a 30-40% webserver marketshare as 'incredibly tiny', and yet Red Hat, the most popular Linux distribution for servers has 0 unpatched vulnerabilities whilst Windows Server 2003 suffers from 8 unpatched vulnerabilities and Windows XP Professional suffers from a full 26 vulnerabilities one or more of which are marked as as highly critical.

    How can claim that Linux is less secure than Windows, when it has less unpatched vulnerabilities?