And you're wrong. There is plenty of Linux malware running, check out andriod, for example. The fact that you are so confident that don't care at all doesn't means that you don't have malware running.
Hahahaha, suuuure, my god you are fanboys, can you just accept that none piece of software is 100% secure? There isn't such thing. I'm not saying that Linux OSes suck, i fact i used to have Ubuntu and Windows 7 as dual boot, i think it's pretty good, but what this guy is saying is bullshit.
It has been shown that many of these systems can be compromised (and because they are closed, there may be holes we simply cannot know about).
-So open source means no bugs, no security holes, no errors.
Plus they are vulnerable to software bugs and are often based on unstable, closed-source operating systems.
-So open source OSes are the only ones that are stables.
Come on man, the article could be so interesting, but you ruined it with that stupid open source fan shit
Install Ubuntu natively on its own disk partition (as you would Windows) and then it doesn't have to go through an extra layer of filesystem (ntfs) as it does when installed via wubi.
Comments about how easy Ubuntu is too install never seem to mention how horrendous Windows is to install... either compare the installation of both on to a bare hard disk, or compared both systems pre-installed in a shop. Compare Apples with Apples... its basic, guys. Really.
Install Kubuntu instead of Ubuntu, and the comments about the "drag screen to top to maximise" are no longer valid, the media player (Amarok and SMPlayer or VLC) and about the photo editor (digikam) now would favour Kubuntu rather than Windows 7 apps.
It is exceedingly easy (just use Kubuntu, really, and avoid wubi) to make all their negative comments about the Linux desktop no longer apply.
Well, Usability: Ubuntu 7????? Windows 7 9?????
1) Come on, Firefox on W7, to install flash it takes a couple of clicks, on Ubuntu it takes like 10 console sentences, and like 30 min package download, ubuntu shoulded get a 5 on that.
2) W7 6 on entertaiment?????, the guy that did this must be on drugs, 0,00001% of the games that run on Windows run on Linux, and ubuntu got a 8?????. Just for that this whole thing lost all validity.
I'm not saying the Ubuntu/Linux in general is shit, it's good, it's free, it's open source, but it just doesn't compare to Windows in most scenarios. People can keep on denying it, but it won't true.
I used Ubuntu, so i'm based on my own experience.
Wooooow, i get it all wrong, now that i've realized know that i've re readed the comment, hahahaha, SORRY, my mistake, i got it all wrong.
P.S.: I HATE Apple, nobody is allow to tell me what to do and what not to do with a product i bought.
What the fuck has to do Android with what we are reading/talking here? go to some Andriod news, god i hate this stupid jerks with their "my choices are better than yours" mental problem
And well, after almost 10 years USA have finally found what they were really looking for, MONEY!!!, well, my congratulations to the world's largest pirate ship.
They are low quality products [1]. Microsoft owns the market share it does because business-wise, they entered a growing market at the right time, with the right sort of software that your average business needs[2]. The operating system and software didn't have to work perfectly. It just has to work most of the time. That is good enough for most businesses ( and government ). It became so widely adopted early on that to change now becomes a matter of better the devil you know than the devil you don't in the eyes of many budget reviews. You don't have to make great software to be good at business.[3]
[1]: you've just convince me, GREAT argumentation!!!.
[2]: "right software" for me means giving people what they want, which is good, and if they sucked, why everybody used them?.
[3]: so, everybody bought their software, i imagine that they bought it because it sucks!!!.
Maybe next time you should think before you post, or at least justify your opinion, "because i say so" is not valid.
Microsoft has proven in the past that it was insecure.
When the source code to XP leaked, there soon were all kinds of worms and trojans. Microsoft relies on security through obscurity, which for some people isn't obscure at all.
If you have the reverse engineering tools, probably custom made, by some foreign investor, you could peak through the security measures. Also microsoft relies on fast patching for problems that are often circumvented sooner or later, because of security vulnerabilities in the patches. I don't need to say, that a patch is easier to reverse than an OS, and presumably quite revealing.
foreing? only foreing people are hackers? what the fuck is wrong with you?
I feel I should point out once again that if Apple or Linux was the #1 most popular with like a 75%+ market share, they'd be the horribly insecure ones that are getting hacked all the time. It's not about the product quality, it's about what thousands of foreign programmers are targetting because they're going to find a security hole eventually no matter what system it is.
Foreign programmers? really? there are no american hackers? Damn', i was sure that there were hackers everywhere
I don't think Microsoft makes low quality software, if fact, the market share that Microsoft owns it's because they make the best products, you can't deny that. I just bought a Windows 7 Ultimate license, i've been using it for some time now and i hadn't any problem, great performance, no malware infection. I've tried Ubuntu Linux 10.04, and it has drivers problems, it's quite hard to install some software (FlashPlayer for the 64 bits), it hangup a couple of times (which didn't happened at all with Windows).
If other software were better than Microsoft's i think a lot of people had changed to it (specially to Linux since it's free and open source)
Slashdot Mirror
around December 30th, according to Mozilla's calendar, rigth?
i just saw the first one...
And you're wrong. There is plenty of Linux malware running, check out andriod, for example. The fact that you are so confident that don't care at all doesn't means that you don't have malware running.
so acutally there is malware for linux and mac, why do you keep saying there isn't?
Did you even check out the links?
Hahahaha, suuuure, my god you are fanboys, can you just accept that none piece of software is 100% secure? There isn't such thing.
I'm not saying that Linux OSes suck, i fact i used to have Ubuntu and Windows 7 as dual boot, i think it's pretty good, but what this guy is saying is bullshit.
It has been shown that many of these systems can be compromised (and because they are closed, there may be holes we simply cannot know about). -So open source means no bugs, no security holes, no errors. Plus they are vulnerable to software bugs and are often based on unstable, closed-source operating systems. -So open source OSes are the only ones that are stables. Come on man, the article could be so interesting, but you ruined it with that stupid open source fan shit
Install Ubuntu natively on its own disk partition (as you would Windows) and then it doesn't have to go through an extra layer of filesystem (ntfs) as it does when installed via wubi.
Comments about how easy Ubuntu is too install never seem to mention how horrendous Windows is to install ... either compare the installation of both on to a bare hard disk, or compared both systems pre-installed in a shop. Compare Apples with Apples ... its basic, guys. Really.
Install Kubuntu instead of Ubuntu, and the comments about the "drag screen to top to maximise" are no longer valid, the media player (Amarok and SMPlayer or VLC) and about the photo editor (digikam) now would favour Kubuntu rather than Windows 7 apps.
It is exceedingly easy (just use Kubuntu, really, and avoid wubi) to make all their negative comments about the Linux desktop no longer apply.
Kubuntu beats Windows 7 handily.
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuure, on what universe?
Well, Usability: Ubuntu 7????? Windows 7 9????? 1) Come on, Firefox on W7, to install flash it takes a couple of clicks, on Ubuntu it takes like 10 console sentences, and like 30 min package download, ubuntu shoulded get a 5 on that.
2) W7 6 on entertaiment?????, the guy that did this must be on drugs, 0,00001% of the games that run on Windows run on Linux, and ubuntu got a 8?????. Just for that this whole thing lost all validity.
I'm not saying the Ubuntu/Linux in general is shit, it's good, it's free, it's open source, but it just doesn't compare to Windows in most scenarios. People can keep on denying it, but it won't true. I used Ubuntu, so i'm based on my own experience.
I think that you are reading too many sci-fi comic books or maybe spending too many time on C&C Red Alert
Wooooow, i get it all wrong, now that i've realized know that i've re readed the comment, hahahaha, SORRY, my mistake, i got it all wrong. P.S.: I HATE Apple, nobody is allow to tell me what to do and what not to do with a product i bought.
What the fuck has to do Android with what we are reading/talking here? go to some Andriod news, god i hate this stupid jerks with their "my choices are better than yours" mental problem
And well, after almost 10 years USA have finally found what they were really looking for, MONEY!!!, well, my congratulations to the world's largest pirate ship.
They are low quality products [1]. Microsoft owns the market share it does because business-wise, they entered a growing market at the right time, with the right sort of software that your average business needs[2]. The operating system and software didn't have to work perfectly. It just has to work most of the time. That is good enough for most businesses ( and government ). It became so widely adopted early on that to change now becomes a matter of better the devil you know than the devil you don't in the eyes of many budget reviews. You don't have to make great software to be good at business.[3]
[1]: you've just convince me, GREAT argumentation!!!. [2]: "right software" for me means giving people what they want, which is good, and if they sucked, why everybody used them?. [3]: so, everybody bought their software, i imagine that they bought it because it sucks!!!. Maybe next time you should think before you post, or at least justify your opinion, "because i say so" is not valid.
Microsoft has proven in the past that it was insecure.
When the source code to XP leaked, there soon were all kinds of worms and trojans. Microsoft relies on security through obscurity, which for some people isn't obscure at all.
If you have the reverse engineering tools, probably custom made, by some foreign investor, you could peak through the security measures. Also microsoft relies on fast patching for problems that are often circumvented sooner or later, because of security vulnerabilities in the patches. I don't need to say, that a patch is easier to reverse than an OS, and presumably quite revealing.
foreing? only foreing people are hackers? what the fuck is wrong with you?
I feel I should point out once again that if Apple or Linux was the #1 most popular with like a 75%+ market share, they'd be the horribly insecure ones that are getting hacked all the time. It's not about the product quality, it's about what thousands of foreign programmers are targetting because they're going to find a security hole eventually no matter what system it is.
Foreign programmers? really? there are no american hackers? Damn', i was sure that there were hackers everywhere
I don't think Microsoft makes low quality software, if fact, the market share that Microsoft owns it's because they make the best products, you can't deny that. I just bought a Windows 7 Ultimate license, i've been using it for some time now and i hadn't any problem, great performance, no malware infection. I've tried Ubuntu Linux 10.04, and it has drivers problems, it's quite hard to install some software (FlashPlayer for the 64 bits), it hangup a couple of times (which didn't happened at all with Windows). If other software were better than Microsoft's i think a lot of people had changed to it (specially to Linux since it's free and open source)