| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 84142 | 2007-10-25 18:53:00 | Windows vs. Linux vs. Mac Security | somebody (208) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 605350 | 2007-10-26 12:31:00 | *nix vulnerabilitys will always be visable and dealt with quickly. That is the nature of an open source community. If there is any possible oversight that may maybe just might be an isuue for security, then it's pointed out by peers who work in friendly compitition and the potentual issue is fixed before it causes any real issues (usually). This philosiphy leads to rather secure systems, but terrible stats if we consider such preventitive maintainance to be a sign of weakness. It's like saying, i have low maintanance costs with my X-car since my X-mechanic doesn't worry about the rattles and stuff, therefore my X-car is more reliable than my Y-car. Makes little sense to me. |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 605351 | 2007-10-26 18:38:00 | Well, I use XP. Its crap. But not as crap as Vista, Linux or Whatever crap apple are selling. The last 3 being so close to useless as to be....well, useless crap. That is to say, They don't suit me at all, not even close.Luke .... join me ..... If only you knew the power of the dark side ... :p Each to their own :) |
Myth (110) | ||
| 605352 | 2007-10-26 20:34:00 | well, I dan't have any security issues with any of my PC's. I have only ever had one virus on my own system in all the years Windows has been available to the public. I don't get MS patches. I very rarely do a spyware scan, Nothing is ever found. And my AV is free and fully automated. Should I be worried? |
Metla (12) | ||
| 605353 | 2007-10-26 21:02:00 | Should I be worried?And in there lies something that triggered the obvious to me . Metla, i would dare to say that you are NOT a typical windows user . Most people use windows because it's there when they get a computer . It's users therefore have a far higher amount of issues as they install every new toy they can get there hands on . I'm told that my friends kid can destroy the lounge computer within a week, just by going to Bebo and clicking on every cool thing that she sees there! While this does raise issues as to how secure windows is used in this environment, it is what is required, something so "user friendly" that installing malicious software is as easy as . . . . . . . . . . . Metla i would say you have no reason to be worried, because you are unlikely to install something that is just plain suspect . However many desktop system users are not that savvy, and assume that if it's on the net, or if they have been invited to download it, then it must be OK!:rolleyes: I'd still advocate installing a Linux system in the family computer that lives in the scenario i mentioned above . It wouldn't be able to run every cool thing seen on the net, which would hopefully make the dude that fixes it breathe a sigh of relief! Of course in a server environment not much of this user ignorance applies, however i'd still be very wary on rating the security of an OS on the basis of how much attention to maintanance it receives!:illogical |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 605354 | 2007-10-26 21:19:00 | Exactly, And the typical Linux user is nothing like the typical Windows user. It they were, You would have the same issue. The actions of the user. Just imagine it, 400 million new users, and the hundreds of thousands of attempts being made to exploit them. Personally, I don't give a rats arse about what my OS is called, as long as it stays in the background and lets me run my preferred programs I'm happy. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 605355 | 2007-10-26 21:20:00 | And the criteria for the article is crap, But thats how it goes, Whats the bet Norton still gets "Editors Pick" in just about every publication when a review is done. Things are different down on the shop floor so to speak. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 605356 | 2007-10-26 21:38:00 | Exactly, And the typical Linux user is nothing like the typical Windows user . It they were, You would have the same issue . Not quite . If several hundred million people migrated to Linux overnight, we would see people bitching about how it won't run whatever, far more than people bitching that the machine can be broken in a day by the kid downloading and running whatever . Actually, i suspect much of this sort of thing sees "the kid" getting the blame for much of "the adults" sillyness . Granted, i know jack about vista, but until windows gets the hang of the concept that no software no matter how big or small may be installed by any user other than the administrator (root under Linux) then it will remain user friendly to the point of being outright vulnerable . Correct me if i'm wrong, but i assume that vista addressed the problem with a bigger marketing budget rather than hard development like draw an absolute line where the user can or can't make changes to the machine they are using without first having administrative rights . |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 605357 | 2007-10-27 00:03:00 | Not quite . If several hundred million people migrated to Linux overnight, we would see people bitching about how it won't run whatever, far more than people bitching that the machine can be broken in a day by the kid downloading and running whatever . Actually, i suspect much of this sort of thing sees "the kid" getting the blame for much of "the adults" silliness . Granted, i know jack about vista, but until windows gets the hang of the concept that no software no matter how big or small may be installed by any user other than the administrator (root under Linux) then it will remain user friendly to the point of being outright vulnerable . Correct me if I'm wrong, but i assume that vista addressed the problem with a bigger marketing budget rather than hard development like draw an absolute line where the user can or can't make changes to the machine they are using without first having administrative rights . I am of the opinion that M/S don't hold back dosh wise when it comes to fixing probs that arise from there system . |
Cicero (40) | ||
| 605358 | 2007-10-27 01:59:00 | well, I dan't have any security issues with any of my PC's. I have only ever had one virus on my own system in all the years Windows has been available to the public. I don't get MS patches. I very rarely do a spyware scan, Nothing is ever found. And my AV is free and fully automated. Should I be worried? And in there lies something that triggered the obvious to me. Metla, i would dare to say that you are NOT a typical windows user. I was much the same as Metla with Windows. I mean, my laptop dual boots XP and Linux, but the Xp Pro is still using SP1. No updates, or SP2 Exactly, And the typical Linux user is nothing like the typical Windows user.Are you saying I'm .... different :confused: :horrified :p And the criteria for the article is crap, But thats how it goes, Whats the bet Norton still gets "Editors Pick" in just about every publication when a review is done. Things are different down on the shop floor so to speak.APC did a recent test using Vista and XP and the various AV's. Nortons scored second or third lowest, well behind AVG and AntiVir. For the record, Kaspersky topped the tests, with F-secure and AntiVir being in the 'recommended' list |
Myth (110) | ||
| 605359 | 2007-10-27 02:15:00 | I am of the opinion that M/S don't hold back dosh wise when it comes to fixing probs that arise from there system.So can non-administrative users still install software to some extent or not? As said, i know jack about vista, but i have always seen this as one of the biggest weaknesses within windows, particually with shared machines. If users can install stuff, chances are they will in a shared environment, and thus another machine gets infected. It's a very obvious weakness. I'm just curious. Vista is too new for me to have been called to fix such damage, as yet, but in preparance for the enevitable, i may as well start learning how is works, and what the commonly exploited weaknesses are. |
personthingy (1670) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 | |||||