Re: Viruses and hackers make Windows more secure - Gates

From: Dazz (cashdj_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 01/30/04 

Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 01:25:17 +1000

On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 14:20:58 -0000, "Hairy One Kenobi"
<abuse@[127.0.0.1]> wrote:

<snipped>

>Hmm. I know it's pointless trying to inject some reason into this debate,
>but those are all *options* in the installation.

No ... well, not according to Bill at least. :-)

But here's an experiment for you. :-)

Try going into Add or Remove Programs, and then into Windows
Components.

Now untick the checkbox next to Internet Explorer, click Next, and
wait until the "uninstall" process is complete.

Tell me what happens.

Is IE really uninstalled? Nope.

The shortcuts disappear (from the desktop and Start Menu), however,
the Program Files -> Internet Explorer directory still exists, and
it's complete with a working version of Internet Explorer (the
iexplore.exe file is still there).

Like it or not, IE is an integral part of Windows XP. You don't have
to use it, but it's still there.

>By all means compare minimal/typical/full installations, but like-for-like,
>please.

This would be rather hard, as the various distro's of Linux generally
offer more flexibility than Windows XP when it comes to installation.

>Out-of-the-box stuff, of course, rather than manually configured stuff. Both
>can be manually configured to be secure.

I agree with you. Both OS's can be configured to be secure.

However, the point was made that "out of the box" XP was more secure
than the "typical Linux distro" which is simply false.

The exploits that have plagued XP since it was released prove this.

>Linux should always tend to have the edge, given the update frequency (e.g.
>Win2000 & RH 6.1 were contemporaries). OTOH, IIRC, RedHat 7 has already
>dropped out of support. (Tried to check on the website, couldn't find the
>EOL page)

Redhat may have dropped support for, say, Redhat 7, however, if I want
to upgrade, say, SSH because of a new exploit, I don't have to ditch
Redhat 7, nor do I have to give two rats arses about Redhat no longer
supporting it.

I'd merely grab the latest SSH sourcecode and compile it, after
backing up the config files, and uninstalling the old version.

In fact, I *cannot* think of one application that may have come with
Redhat 7 that I can't find the source code for, or at the very least,
a replacement of some kind.

Even the linux kernel (the guts) does not require me needing support
from Redhat to update it. I can grab the latest kernel, compile it,
and have an up-to-date system (including hardware support).

Try doing that on Windows 2000. :-)

Dazz

>H1K
>

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Red hat Linux requires product activation
    ... If RedHat does not suit your style, ... It only will run on Windows. ... the end user with RH or no support for the applications. ... Stan Bischof ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: Why Is the Mac More Secure than Windows?
    ... >> rather get into American Express networks or DOD networks (all Windows ... > with security in mind is always more secure than one that is not. ... PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE provide something to support this oft ... posted countless times in my short six months here. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Why Is the Mac More Secure than Windows?
    ... rather get into American Express networks or DOD networks (all Windows btw). ... That being said OSX on UNIX is more secure as it was designed to be ... I've seen this dribbled posted countless times in my short six months here. ... What I have yet to see is facts to support it. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Why Is the Mac More Secure than Windows?
    ... rather get into American Express networks or DOD networks (all Windows ... with security in mind is always more secure than one that is not. ... PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE provide something to support this oft ... posted countless times in my short six months here. ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Red hat Linux requires product activation
    ... >I can't see who is likely to get vastly much value out of RHAT ... > support is the generic patches/updates, ... dis-information about RedHat requiring activation and then degenerated ... This is not at all the same situation as Windows. ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
Quantcast