Exactly.
Printable View
Exactly.
Not always. The NT range is one heck of a step up from the 9x range in terms of security.
I am still weary, and will remain so as long as Gates is still being quoted as saying "Windows Vista is the most secure Operating System ever!"
yeah, some how I kind of doubt that.
I think it's something like the American constition permitting slavery -- the key point is that slaves weren't considered people.
Bill can say that because he doesn't really believe anything else counts as an operating system :p
Gates just doesn't know about other OS's. Either that, or if you think about it, Windows has always had to be more secure than the competition even to look horribly insecure as, it is the only OS that receives so much attention from the hackers, phishers and crackers.
Look at it from the point of view of the folks writing the code for these OS's. Sure Linux can easily be made more secure than Windows is to Windows vulnerabilities but, how many hackers have gone after Linux? What are its inherent security liabilities? I doubt few people even know. I sure don't but, almost everyone who knows much at all about this issue knows about several current or recent Windows vulnerabilities.
I say give the darn thing a shot (vista) when and if it becomes available for what you are running, hardware-wise, and looks to be better than your current OS. In the end, it will most likely gain at least a significant niche via its preloaded installed base.
This is (mostly) a myth. Linux has a far larger slice of the server market than Windows does, and so is, if not as tempting a target for crackers (a server is likely to be harder to break, after all), at least not so small as to be considered insignificant.Quote:
Windows has always had to be more secure than the competition even to look horribly insecure as, it is the only OS that receives so much attention from the hackers, phishers and crackers.
Look at it from the point of view of the folks writing the code for these OS's. Sure Linux can easily be made more secure than Windows is to Windows vulnerabilities but, how many hackers have gone after Linux? What are its inherent security liabilities? I doubt few people even know. I sure don't but, almost everyone who knows much at all about this issue knows about several current or recent Windows vulnerabilities.
Phishing is, of course, OS-independent, although various techniques for making it look more convincing rely on software bugs.Agreed. The "when and if" is the key point, however.Quote:
I say give the darn thing a shot (vista) when and if it becomes available for what you are running, hardware-wise, and looks to be better than your current OS. In the end, it will most likely gain at least a significant niche via its preloaded installed base.
You got me on that one once before Twey but, here we are talking about PC OS's.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twey
There really is something about Windows that drives people crazy, probably its near monopoly status as the PC OS. Folks had a similar view of Ma Bell when it was the only phone company in the USA. Phreaking (as it was known - the unauthorized use of the phone system) was, as far as I know, at its all time high just before the Bell divestiture. You hardly hear about it at all these days.
Right. And, either way, Macs are much more safe in terms of security because linux and windows can fight it out for the attention of hackers while OSX happily watches, behind a nice safety net of unpopularity ;)
Aye, but the boundary is stretched a little with Linux, since it's both. The big servers nowadays, however (supercomputers excepted) are mostly Intel- or AMD-based.Quote:
You got me on that one once before Twey but, here we are talking about PC OS's.
The thing to consider is, are these people going to then go ahead and use Windows anyway? I think not. This means they're confined to <15% of computer users. Of the >85% that are Windows users, some of them view Linux or Mac (or both) with an equal fervor of hatred that users of these operating systems tend to bear for Windows. The density of these folk is likely to be far less, of course, but it can be 5× lower without tipping the balance against Windows.Quote:
There really is something about Windows that drives people crazy, probably its near monopoly status as the PC OS.
That's because digitalisation of the 'phone lines blurred the boundaries between phreaking and cracking.Quote:
Phreaking (as it was known - the unauthorized use of the phone system) was, as far as I know, at its all time high just before the Bell divestiture. You hardly hear about it at all these days.
Heh :) Oh well, maybe your OS will find a bigger niche at some point, then you can join us :pQuote:
Right. And, either way, Macs are much more safe in terms of security because linux and windows can fight it out for the attention of hackers while OSX happily watches, behind a nice safety net of unpopularity ;)
That's the funny thing. I love macs, but it's actually in my best interest to discourage others from using them :D