On Sat, May 21, 2005 at 08:46:24PM +0530, Rony Bill wrote:
First, Linux is not 100% compatible with top results, to all the common hardware that goes into a new system, including internal modems, dot matrix printers, scanners, cell phones etc.
Er? Sure it is. Unless you're buying Windows-branded hardware, which is just stupid.
Second, many internet based services including service providers and websites are optimised for Windows and Internet Explorer.
That is wrong, and that is changing. Jeez, what do you expect if you roll over and die for the Microsoft machine? People need to complain on hitting a web site that isn't.
Third, security issues need knowledge and understanding of the internet and its problems. A windows user with the proper knowledge of the same is as safe and secure as a linux user. My personal experience is that
So why not use Linux?
there are much more graphical softwares and utilities for windows that help the user to not only be more secure but even keep track of the net activity without too much indepth knowledge of the OS, as would be
As there are on Linux.
required in Linux and one drawback of linux is that many security softwares work in root mode only, therefore they require the user to know the root password. Maybe I am not aware of doing the same in user mode without root password. Even kppp does not work in user mode without gksu --> root passwd.
So install Ubuntu, it works better in the dipshit mode that you seem to prefer.
Fourth, I know a Windows user who has accidently used his OS ('98) without any antivirus loaded for more than a week and he has been doing online trading on a cable internet. When the av was loaded, no viruses were found. I know another '98 user whose machine is an old Pentium 233 and his antivirus had expired a few years ago. He uses his system everyday to make calls to his children in the US. He had no viruses. Net security depends a lot on what sites the user surfs and what security levels are set in his browser. A good firewall and live anti-spyware does a great job in windows for unwanted attacks. The 'HOSTS' file also plays a crucial role in blocking known bad sites.
As it does on Linux. So?
Why are viruses and trojans not created for linux? When linux overtakes windows in client machines, will there be a possibility of viruses and trojans being created for linux too?
Trojans, sure. But the security model disallows random execution as root -- which is why we're always screaming for people to not IRC as root, for example.
If a linux user surfs the net without a firewall and with java scripting active in his browser, will his system be prone to hacking attempts and key logging/password grabbing?
Sure. At least the user's account will. the entire machine may be safe depending on it is set up.
Lets look at the issue in a practical way rather than randomly curse all windows users/installers. The OS is selected by the user. The installer has to follow market forces.
You're just spreading FUD. FOAD. I can anticipate every one of your responses, too. I know you and people like you simply won't listen. Why do I bother.