75% of the net uses Apache. The vast majority of that is on *nix. You were saying?
There are flaws on every platform. The difference is what you can do with the flaw. On Windows your given the key to the city. On Linux you'll be lucky if you can execute anything.
And the fact that few of them use Windows is a coincidence?
A Linux virus would spread rapidly because of the density of Linux boxes in a ip block is high (Datacenter blocks would be popular). Who cares if it gets taken down in a day. It would take 5 mins to get a 1,000 dedi strong botnet and that will remove nearly any website for a couple of hours.
If a virus hit any one of my dedis I wouldnt know for a couple of days. If it disguised itsself well then it could hide indefinately without my knowledge.
Mind you the couple of days is because I'm kinda slack. Nothing can touch my servers so I dont need to look at them.
If the virus spread itsself (which by definition it must) then it wouldnt matter at all if it was removed within hours. It only takes 30 seconds to wipe a website off the net for hours with that amount of cpu and bandwidth.
Do tell me how antivirus can work without tapping in to the kernel.
In order to scan files when they are written and opened the antivirus must be able to step in between the hard drive and the applications.
Microsoft is patching it so only they can tap in to the kernel. They arent patching it to fix a security flaw. Name one virus which patches the kernel.
If a botnet creator could break in to Linux servers he most certainly would. Millions of high powered servers with big fat net connections. The net would tremble in fear.
Instead they are forced to infect crappy home computers.
There is a slight difference between what you said and what Microsoft is actually doing.
MS isnt fixing anything. If they fixed the problems then you wouldnt need antivirus would you?
They are keeping the old flaws and just making their own competing product. A competing product which gets exclusive access to the computer so no other security software can function.
Firefox is the best for most people. Opera isnt for everyone. Personally I use Seamonkey and cringe a little when I use Firefox (I flinch whenever I see IE).
Most cameras should be supported. Vritually every camera with a usb port supports a standard protocol so anything can use it. There are some propietry ones but they are old and the minority.
Slashdot Mirror
lol. I think the mirror network wont have any troubles.
Using Bittorrent is a little redundant.
Due to the way Mozilla creates the UI its a little difficult to make it look like each operating system.
Acid 2 support would be nice but its a little unrealistic to achieve.
As is its got brilliant CSS support.
Your very good at guessing.
And noone needs a windows exe since we are just going to emerge world and find it automagically installed.
IIS has less flaws than Apache? Rofl.
Guess what MS uses when they get DDOSed (normally by their own Operating System).
Yep you guessed it. Linux.
Last time I checked he wasnt in the US so he doesnt need to follow your laws.
75% of the net uses Apache. The vast majority of that is on *nix.
You were saying?
There are flaws on every platform. The difference is what you can do with the flaw.
On Windows your given the key to the city. On Linux you'll be lucky if you can execute anything.
And the fact that few of them use Windows is a coincidence?
A Linux virus would spread rapidly because of the density of Linux boxes in a ip block is high (Datacenter blocks would be popular).
Who cares if it gets taken down in a day. It would take 5 mins to get a 1,000 dedi strong botnet and that will remove nearly any website for a couple of hours.
If a virus hit any one of my dedis I wouldnt know for a couple of days.
If it disguised itsself well then it could hide indefinately without my knowledge.
Mind you the couple of days is because I'm kinda slack. Nothing can touch my servers so I dont need to look at them.
If the virus spread itsself (which by definition it must) then it wouldnt matter at all if it was removed within hours. It only takes 30 seconds to wipe a website off the net for hours with that amount of cpu and bandwidth.
There arent any new APIs which allow a level playing field. MS *will* have the upperhand.
A rootkit on windows just creates a new administrator account. No need for it to go digging through the kernel.
Firefox has a good blend of features out of the box. Just because its customisable doesnt mean you have to customise it.
Do tell me how antivirus can work without tapping in to the kernel.
In order to scan files when they are written and opened the antivirus must be able to step in between the hard drive and the applications.
Microsoft is patching it so only they can tap in to the kernel.
They arent patching it to fix a security flaw. Name one virus which patches the kernel.
But *nix IS more popular - just not in the home.
If a botnet creator could break in to Linux servers he most certainly would.
Millions of high powered servers with big fat net connections. The net would tremble in fear.
Instead they are forced to infect crappy home computers.
Whats stopping MS from doing it though?
I give their morals 6 months before the MS execs start grabbing at the cash.
There is a slight difference between what you said and what Microsoft is actually doing.
MS isnt fixing anything. If they fixed the problems then you wouldnt need antivirus would you?
They are keeping the old flaws and just making their own competing product.
A competing product which gets exclusive access to the computer so no other security software can function.
Better browsers is dependant on the person.
Firefox is the best for most people. Opera isnt for everyone.
Personally I use Seamonkey and cringe a little when I use Firefox (I flinch whenever I see IE).
IBM PC Convertable? Where can I buy myself one of them? /me begs this not to be a typo. ;)
They must surely get the chicks crawling over you.
Since when was Windows 3.1 better than X-Tree Gold?
I still yearn for X-Tree Gold's simplicity.
If it was then America wouldnt be lead by Bush would they?
Yeah its depressing how only a very small minority of people think for themselves.
I sniggered when I read "peer to peer website".
Peer to Peer websites dont exactly exist.
Most cameras should be supported. Vritually every camera with a usb port supports a standard protocol so anything can use it.
There are some propietry ones but they are old and the minority.
Nah MS cost cutting resulted in the graphic designers having monochrome monitors.
Vista being a toy is very good actually.
Businesses wont want the distractions so they'll switch to better operating systems.