Linux limiting? I don't think so, but that's a different can of worms.
And yes, you are correct that a new Linux version is released every month or so. However, for the most part these are minor kernel versions, and not even worth upgrading to unless you know what you're upgrading for. If you are referring to a new distribution releases, that is completely different to a new Windows release. Windows releases do not have easy or rolling upgrade paths. Also, with Linux, you aren't frozen out of certain services because they require a newer version of Windows (or at least, something like this is extremely rare, and... it's not like you have to pay for a new version, or anything).
The point I'm trying to make is that I inferred from your post that upgrading Linux distributions/kernels is mandatory and regular, but I think it is neither. Also, it's free. Windows upgrades aren't.
Now, the security point. You could say that it takes someone with Windows know-how 15 minutes to secure it, or at least protect it from some worms. I'd say it's even quicker than that. I'd also say that even Joe Desktop could happily click "next" a lot on the Fedora installer (for example), and end up with a completely secure system, unless he is actually being targetted by someone, in which case Windows is going to be screwed too. I suppose I've just made the same point as the Mac fan who replied to this also. Also, Joe Desktop who clicked "next" a lot in the Fedora installer has probably ended up with a desktop he is perfectly happy with, with all the applications he needs to do what he does.
> That's because we've actually freaken BEEN THERE.
And the South Pole belongs to Norway? I know it's not a perfect analogy, but hell, they were there first albeit not the last, and the US isn't going to be the last nation to send men to the Moon.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux limiting? I don't think so, but that's a different can of worms.
And yes, you are correct that a new Linux version is released every month or so. However, for the most part these are minor kernel versions, and not even worth upgrading to unless you know what you're upgrading for. If you are referring to a new distribution releases, that is completely different to a new Windows release. Windows releases do not have easy or rolling upgrade paths. Also, with Linux, you aren't frozen out of certain services because they require a newer version of Windows (or at least, something like this is extremely rare, and... it's not like you have to pay for a new version, or anything).
The point I'm trying to make is that I inferred from your post that upgrading Linux distributions/kernels is mandatory and regular, but I think it is neither. Also, it's free. Windows upgrades aren't.
Now, the security point. You could say that it takes someone with Windows know-how 15 minutes to secure it, or at least protect it from some worms. I'd say it's even quicker than that. I'd also say that even Joe Desktop could happily click "next" a lot on the Fedora installer (for example), and end up with a completely secure system, unless he is actually being targetted by someone, in which case Windows is going to be screwed too. I suppose I've just made the same point as the Mac fan who replied to this also. Also, Joe Desktop who clicked "next" a lot in the Fedora installer has probably ended up with a desktop he is perfectly happy with, with all the applications he needs to do what he does.
Maybe IHJBT, but whatever.
> That's because we've actually freaken BEEN THERE.
And the South Pole belongs to Norway? I know it's not a perfect analogy, but hell, they were there first albeit not the last, and the US isn't going to be the last nation to send men to the Moon.