Erach wrote:
Hi, I was busy. Happy Parsi New Year.
JTD replied whose reply I intepret as follows that Windows (am I correct ---- does not have a secure kernel like UNIX)---- then how is Windows security done.
Actually JTD's answer meant that the kernel and user space memory allocation are well defined in linux and not so much in windows this means that user run programs are less likely to affect a system's security in linux than it is in windows (correct me if I am wrong)
Now, for all over Mumbai/INDIA, WIFI can we say that we have to have a secure kernel ---- for banks can one advocate a "develop new applications / enhancements over LINUX development tool with Windows running on top of LINUX using the emulator VIRTUALBOX which is open source).
what is the need for windows if an equivalent program can be made available in linux, sometimes even "windows programs" run glitch free in linux using WINE
Now the key issue is that has anyone taken a software project of say one year and shown it is cheaper to develop using Windows v/s LINUX for the "easy to use touted set of Windows tool v/s which tool set to use of LINUX".
the issue with such a study is that the people concerned are generally reluctant to move to a new platform, given that, I can vouch for the usablity of linux with a personal example, my dad has been bed ridden since 2003 and internet is one of the few links that keeps him in touch with the outside, he was just as new to windows as he was to linux thus making him one of the best judges for such a comparison, well he loves to work in linux as much as possible and wonders, why everyone still sticks to windoze.
Surya