Linux Vs Windows in security

Brian Fahrlander brian at
Tue Aug 14 12:02:55 UTC 2007

Matthew Flaschen wrote:

>> Then, where is  really the security ?
> You're only considering two issues. Linux is more secure in other respects.

     I remember the day the IBM PC was released; the day Windows 3.0 
came out.  I remember CP/M and MP/M in my first days of my career.  Back 
in those days you bought the hardware and asked around for 
was a lot like Linux is now: all about the job.

     But these days the computer is a freakish that 
doesn't work, but we continually keep messing with it. Drivers that 
don't work for empire-building reasons. Almost everyone has a Windows 98 
box that stopped working and they just bought another. (It lives in the 
attic now) It's never fast enough, and most of the mission questions are 
all asked and answered by people 'behind a curtain' and the choices we 
get to make are all after the fact...except Linux.

     Don't forget that viruses, even spam are security holes. Entire 
processes like email and browsing are presented to us with holes from 
the factory that 'somehow' are already known before deployment. One 
service pack closes a set of holes, and opens more for no verifyable 
reason...other than it keeps Microsoft shops in business.

     Did you realize that the current 'live' crop of viruses contains 
over a million entries?  More than 10,000 a month are added. This isn't 
a handful of angry teens in Bolivia; this is an industry with a cashflow.

     ActiveDirectory is a good example of their predatory technologies; 
put that in, and, just because there's a gui for the database (because 
they don't need to ask anyone, or make vendors agree on standards) they 
just MAKE the standards by declaring it so...and once installed users 
"must" have it and Linux has no comparable offering...making it that 
much harder to convert them to Linux.

     And let's not forget the BSA, and the $100,000 liability that 
running Windows incurs.  One employee blows the whistle and they could 
be coming after you. In theory Windows Genuine Advantage(TM) is supposed 
to take care of it, but isn't that just another stormtrooper tool?

     And let's not forget the legacy of bankrupted hopefuls that made 
the mistake of partnering with them...Sybase, Spyglass...and the 20 
years of NOTHING happening in the industry because Microsoft is the 
leader,and 'killer apps' get eaten by no investment is 
unavailable. So instead of fostering technology, it blocks it.

     And it really bugs me that I started a ton of businesses with 
Microsoft, and now they're stuck with it.  They flush-n-fill every 
workstation, every night because they can't be effective enough at virus 
removal. And the way ahead in corporate America is moving to 
virtualization where Windows can get even greater accomodation to do the 
same job for which it was intended. There's so much work around a 
mediocre project that makes demands of money, time, and frustration.

     I guess what keeps me in Linux is that, when there's a problem, 
it's a *genuine* problem...not another ploy to prop up a corporation. 
We have problems, like everything, but we're working on'em.  Our 
programmers don't 'put in eight', but take a special pride in the work. 
"you're not breaking my code" is the mindset.

     There's no honesty in Windows. There's no support, either, unless 
you have a a million-dollar contract, or think that a 900 number to 
nowhere is support. You're committed to outside sources that may or may 
not have your best interests in mind. Of the 10-20 such shops, only one 
honest place exists in this town.

     Linux gives us back our computers; we own them...shouldn't we make 
all the decisions? Pointing to a single perceived weakness and claiming 
we're the same is myopic.
  Brian Fahrländer                 Christian, Conservative, and Technomad
  Evansville, IN                    
  ICQ: 5119262                         AOL/Yahoo/GoogleTalk: WheelDweller

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list