Security Report: Windows Vs Linux

[borfast]

Haven't finished reading the whole thing yet, but from what I have read, it seems like a very interesting article!

 

The Register story here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/10/22/li...ndows_security/

 

Full article here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/security/secu...ndows_vs_linux/

Edited October 22, 2004 by TCH-Raul

[stevevan]

Interesting article indeed! I'm afraid that this "Windows vs Linux" arguement will go on forever...no matter how many facts are stated both pro and con. I'm at the point now where I just state what I know, and "agree to disagree" with whomever I'm arguing against on the subject.

 

(Personal opinion: Anything *nix is better than Micro$oft! Thumbs Up )

[Deverill]

I don't think there is much serious/educated doubt that flavors of Unix are more secure than Windows. The only hold backs are:

1. "Everything" is already on windows.

2. Windows is generally more familiar to users than Linux et al.

3. "We have all this software for Windows and don't want to have to replace it."

4. "We can't live without Software-X and it's only on Windows."

5. "If it's cheap it can't possibly be good."

6. The source of many lawsuits - "All our computers come with Windows already on them."

 

These problems, or at least the perception of the problems by those in charge, are the mountains Linux and other Unix variants must overcome to become the mainstream operating systems they should be. I hope it happens soon!

[MikeJ]

These problems, or at least the perception of the problems by those in charge, are the mountains Linux and other Unix variants must overcome to become the mainstream operating systems they should be. I hope it happens soon!

I'm not so sure about that myself.

 

Mainstream is not always a good thing.

[DarqFlare]

I would really like to see all software head for all operating systems, but we all know that it takes time and money to develop cross-platform...

 

But say, if games like Halo 2 for PC were playable on Linux as well (Published by Microsoft, HAH!), for example, then we;d be in a situation where people would choose their OS by preference, not by available software.

[Deverill]

Then we;d be in a situation where people would choose their OS by preference, not by available software.

Bingo! This is probably the single most powerful obstacle to Linux and friends getting the popularity and widespread use they deserve. For instance, I don't even have Office on my laptop but I am making due without it but I do have Macromedia Studio MX that I'll not pay for again unless it's an upgrade. I can make it without it but I'd rather not throw away the money or use a 2nd-choice (to me) editor.

 

MikeJ, I know what you mean about it... big corporation taking over Linux could turn ugly, but on the other hand having to support a bazillion users getting viruses and popups and spyware on Microsoft platform makes me long for the day it happens.

[DarqFlare]

Jim, the problem is that if Linux became as widespread as Windows, then there would still be the problem of viruses. The reason that you rarely see Linux viruses is simply because virus writers don't focus on it: they can damage more people by hitting Windows.

 

The whole point of a virus is to maximize who gets hit, so Linus gets a freebie here because Windows is everywhere... but if Linux had the vast reach of Windows, I feel we'd see more viruses for it. Though it is still more secure.

[borfast]

The whole point of a virus is to maximize who gets hit, so Linus gets a freebie here because Windows is everywhere... but if Linux had the vast reach of Windows, I feel we'd see more viruses for it.

Robert, go read the article...

[Deverill]

What he said

 

Besides, if you are talking dollars I'd suspect that Unix variants are more commonly used in "Big business" than MS products, therefor more dollars affected - more publicity - etc. I think it's a myth about the virus - it seems unix is much better protected against it. Afterall, what bonehead operating system ties the web browser directly into the heart of the OS?

[champagnemojo]

Well, the numbers thing is probably a partially valid rationale for the lack of spyware and adware on linux. Although it would be more difficult for them to hide from linux users too admittedly. But as mentioned, linux is widely used in servers and such...so it's hardly not a tempting target to virus-writing miscreants.

 

My theory is that the virus-writers are largely linux users and don't want to write anything that might impact themselves.