Just the fact this guy had to write a multi-page article to figure out which version of Linux, web browser, and office suite just shows how far Microsoft is ahead. There is a power in unified development and vision; it's a power that will keep Windows on top and Linux fragmented. Last time I checked Microsoft offered free easy updates to the Windows operating systems, but it seems to get easy updates you have to pay monthly in the Linux world. There seems to be this duality in Linux which is 'it's free if you're a geek, but you have to pay if your not'. Free Linux vs XP is one thing, but pay Linux + monthly fees vs. XP is another, and for the average user it's going to be pay Linux.
This may actually happen, but then what do you expect. Maybe everyone will see their flawed way and rin linux which is even more insecure to a novice user. After the whole world is on linux then somone will release an even more terrible virus which will wipe out all of thos machines also. The point is that security flaws are usally either coding error or design errors and their rate is partially determined by lines of code. You cannot belive that the linux community is just so much smarter than the folks at Redmond. The bootom line is that where the OS is exposed to the outside world there is a posibility of comprimise. Another point many are making is that linux comes out with patches sooner so the exposure is less, but how does a novice use go about implimenting the patches released> At least Microsoft has is nice and packaged up and allows you to choos whether or not to D/L and apply. Do you expect every user to recompile the kernal or some other driver if there is a problem? I think if linux were on %90 of the desktops there would be 100 times more problems than with a Microsoft OS.
Slashdot Mirror
Just the fact this guy had to write a multi-page article to figure out which version of Linux, web browser, and office suite just shows how far Microsoft is ahead. There is a power in unified development and vision; it's a power that will keep Windows on top and Linux fragmented. Last time I checked Microsoft offered free easy updates to the Windows operating systems, but it seems to get easy updates you have to pay monthly in the Linux world. There seems to be this duality in Linux which is 'it's free if you're a geek, but you have to pay if your not'. Free Linux vs XP is one thing, but pay Linux + monthly fees vs. XP is another, and for the average user it's going to be pay Linux.
This may actually happen, but then what do you expect. Maybe everyone will see their flawed way and rin linux which is even more insecure to a novice user. After the whole world is on linux then somone will release an even more terrible virus which will wipe out all of thos machines also. The point is that security flaws are usally either coding error or design errors and their rate is partially determined by lines of code. You cannot belive that the linux community is just so much smarter than the folks at Redmond. The bootom line is that where the OS is exposed to the outside world there is a posibility of comprimise. Another point many are making is that linux comes out with patches sooner so the exposure is less, but how does a novice use go about implimenting the patches released> At least Microsoft has is nice and packaged up and allows you to choos whether or not to D/L and apply. Do you expect every user to recompile the kernal or some other driver if there is a problem? I think if linux were on %90 of the desktops there would be 100 times more problems than with a Microsoft OS.