GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Originally posted by logosys I remember a similar article when WinXP was released... But no, THIS time will be different - I bet Mickeysoft will get it RIGHT this time!
Partially true, I mean the part about it being similar. Evertime MS comes out with something it is intended to destroy all other's and never does... they did this since the first 95 release but are intensifying because Open Source it becoming more of a threat then they wish to admit.
Windows can release all the OS's and (quote "Killer Apps" /unquote) but it wont change anything. If Linux was not a threat they would not even be mentioning it...
and BTW... It has taken MS many years to realize that it's security is a joke and they are trying to get comsumer confidence back by implimenting many Linux/Unix techniqes.
It has taken MS many years to realize that it's security is a joke and they are trying to get comsumer confidence back by implimenting many Linux/Unix techniqes.
Seems like a great idea. I mean building something on rock solid UNIX security model. But, unfortunately, Microsoft has great history of trying to add something in their own and blow it all in process...
Security doesn't depend entirely in the OS, but Microsoft doesn't take their part seriously. Vista is still expected to run antivirus programs. It will be the same history. We will see those worms and patches. The best security approach involves user's education and it's the one taken by Unix-like OS. The best desktop OS so far that has a good history of security without user's intervention is MacOS. The same is possible with Linux as MacOS is based on FreeBSD. We're reaching this point. MacOS intel-inside will be silently replacing many windows boxes. Threats to Microsoft are coming from everywhere.
Symantec recently said there has been more cracker attacks this year. A true approach to security would bypass the insecure design we've accustomed to deal and these companies would have to seek alternatives.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.